/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>50698511
267,241 cope posts.

My narrative is simple. I think CSW is SN, according to my research. All info I found is public. That being said CSW is also an autitistic idiot quite often. He makes too big claims with timelines that simply don't always work out, as there's too many moving parts. However, time tends to vindicate him in general.
>CSW claimed Bitcoin is Turing Complete
He turned out to be correct and was the first ever to claim Turing Completeness for Bitcoin. BSV is Turing Complete. (for midwits this = Smart Contracts, like ETH)
>CSW said big blocks work
They work. You can see 4GB blocks where fees are higher than subsidy. This is impossible on BTC, look at any Block. It's also why BTC cucks start talking about inflating the 21m cap, cause they otherwise can't keep miners sticking around, especially as L2's siphon fees as well. (99% of miner revenue = subsidy)
>Coins will move.
Well... maybe they are moving right now as we speak? (;
Also, counter question: Would it be beneficial for him to move it in obvious sight of the public? He'd destroy the market liquidity and trust in the market, it'd be a somewhat owngoal kinda thing to do. However I think eventually he will do just that.
>He said EoM (July 2022) Coinbase and Kraken would be in trouble.
SEC investigates both of them now. Who tipped the SEC off? (;

In the case of McC I think CSW overshot a little. I don't know the exact details as the lawsuit is not properly public, but afaik he claimed a specific conference declined him due to McC, but he could not prove it, possibly McC could even disprove it. But he still won the case nonetheless.

>>50698627
>Your picrel isn't saying what you think its saying.
My picrel says what it says. McC dropped the truth claim. He might have meme'd a little on Twitter with this tweet, but he certainly did not meme in court when he retreated, and boy it was a smart move for McC, cause he would be totally fucked otherwise.