/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>11896075
Miners keep putting in more time energy and money into POW but are running out of fiat. They have drained too much too fast.
Do not buy POW coins, the entire market is compromised. Buy NANO or IOTA or EOS or ARK or LSK or motherfucking TRON even.
ETH is somewhat ok but only if you are loading up for staking.

>>11896075
>Coingeek is backing out of BCHSV

>>11896075
That was a bit fast. And Craig was so sure at first that they would win.

>>11896075
>>Coingeek is backing out of BCHSV

>>11896130
> Enterprise class full node
So they plan on selling specialized mining equipment going harder on POW.
POW is compromised and unstable. Large actors get larger until they have a strange hold on the market. Then they do retarded shit like we all just saw because they don't understand tech.
Don't support that.

>>11896163
fuck off with your shitcoin

>>11896130

This is ancient news, its like 12 months old but reposted today for you dumb bagholders so you can fomo into this scamcoin.

>>11896163
When there was just a collection of large actors prior to the fragmentation of the market caused by core asshattery, nakamoto consensus backed by proof of work actually worked.
It was only when devs made, social media propagandised, and shitwit clueless cunts demanded, idiotic changes that nakamoto consensus broke down and miners became completely mercenary.
Core is to blame for this.

>>11896180
Which one? Choose anything not POW theres like 100 at least. More when ETH switches.
Miner days are numbered. Or did you think there would be no consequence to intentionally crashing the market after 10 months of loses for the average retail investor?
Good riddance.

>>11896163
pow is still the best option all the rest is even worse. sadly.

>>11896130
>Terabyte blocks

Who are these people trying to impress? The equivalent of a 10 dollar whore with 0.01 BTC stuck on her bitbean wallet? lmao

>>11896225
I agree completely, which is why I sold my BTC last year when it became apparent that they would fail the load test.
I still thought BCH would be cool. But it turns out the miner game selected for retards.

>>11896311
I'm convinced they are actually going out of their way to look stupid. If you look at all the coretard accusations of what BCH was, SV are wholeheartedly emracing it and amping it up x10.

>>11896075
fake news
https://cash.coin.dance/blocks/todaysv
last coingeek block was 1 hour ago

>>11896328
Not necessarily. If the BCH fork was a test, it's hard to describe it in any other way than a pass with flying colours. For one, the major stakeholders in BCH were prepared to spot the cash to purchase a mercenary army of hashing power to protect the fork, and for two, rather than just dogmatically sticking to nakamoto consensus despite a clear and present 4 exahash opponent loudly threatening them with re-org attacks, they made changes to the chain that mean now even in that situation, it's not vulnerable to attack.
They've basically come to the correct conclusion; nakamoto consensus is broken, and taken appropriate actions to ensure integrity of the ledger regardless. And they're honing it further.

>>11896371
nakamoto consensus wouldn't be broken if people and exchanges actually honored it. if SV overtakes ABC with the most proof of work they SHOULD get the BCH ticker on all exchanges even if it is two months from now. they probably won't though and that's when SV gains a lot of support from people like me who actually wants bitcoin to work like it should.

>>11896365
this

op is just an fucking retard

>>11896438
>nakamoto consensus wouldn't be broken
if bch didn't exist yeah

>>11896130

>>coingeek partners with nchain

>bchsv partners with bchsv

>>11896152

>bitcoinSV is a return to how bitcoin was originally

>btw lol we have terabyte blocks now

lol

>>11896438
>>11896371
Miners are a fundamentally broken abstraction. Why not put that energy to work providing a datacenter and sell on SONM? Instead they turn crypto to fiat and give it to energy companies while providing close to zero utility.
As miners extracted millions per day from the crypto market cap, noone used either SV or BCH.

>>11896119
Trying to cannibalize the other starving criminal con artist assholes on Burst Bubble Island will only further reduce your chances of survival. But you would never have gotten shipwrecked there if you had been honest and crypto wasn't built on lies.

>>11896520
Those breasts are built on lies. Yet you still posted them, anon.

>>11896543
No, they aren't. I like her because they aren't built on lies, they are natural. Unlike the crypto ecosystem.

>>11896438
If BSV actually worked at all, or even worked close to as well as BCH, you might have a point.
But it doesn't, it's an epic failure, literally everything they promised and threatened they failed to deliver on, and in some cases it even backfired on them. By contrast to the BCH pass, BSV;
> own goaled its own chain with a re-org attack
> utterly failed to attack BCH, and in fact made it impossible for them to realistically leverage their hashing power in any future dispute due to the changes their hollow threats provoked
> alienated upward of 90% of the stakeholders in BCH
> threw massive amounts of economic weight behind an obviously failed deadend project
> dumped coin value to like 70 USD.
> made Calvin look like the victim of a con artist
> made CSW look even more like a con artist than he did before, and given how much he already looked like a con artist, this is fucking amazing.
> when they propagated a block *HALF* of their own fucking block limit, it blew out their network and took 40 minutes to propagate
> They're *STILL* ten days afterward behind on accumulated proof of work, and they are massively unprofitable to keep mining while BCH is now profitable to mine and doesn't need to hire extra mercenary hash. They may well absolutely never catch up at all.
> They hire SV shill brigades to spam 4chan 24/7 in extremely obvious and sad ways.
> They managed to make Ryan X Charles, one of the most eloquent and interesting speakers in the BCH ecosystem look like a nut job just by association.
> This isn't even a complete list.
At this stage it's just embarrassing desu.

>>11896506
Yeah, I basically agree with you, the state of the market being what it is. It's a shame it had to come to this, but we don't live in a perfect world, and it was crazy to ever think the opposition wouldn't fight back. So, back into the fray, win or die.

>>11896075
>Coingeek is backing out of BCHSV

>>11896724
lol, this guy's twitter feed is a fucking trainwreck, he's calling old avalon miners bitmain machines, and generally acting like an idiotic BTC/BSV shill in a very transparent and obvious way, unironically re-tweets fucking Samson Mow of all people.. If you actually believe that shit, you're on drugs.

>>11896599
This whole thing is making me like linkies. Yes, they do spam the board, but they seem so harmless and even funny at times. But the SV spam has been like a toxic smog on the board.

Picture: Coingeek has definitely cut down their mining hash at the moment. They used to have ~70% of hash at all times on the SV chain, but suddenly, in the last hours, they have had only 1 block from 12. Also, within the last hour, only one SV block has been found. Something has happened.

>>11896825
SV spam is temporary, linkies are spamming for over a year.
Nobody would mind if they created one link general and spammed fat sergey memes all day long, instead there were times when most active threads were about link, each with 1-3 posts

>>11896825
They were trying to fight a war of attrition and hit the people who were paying for the higher hash on the BCH chain, but that doesn't work when the hash is simply most profitable to mine at the level it's at like BCH is right now. Both networks are roughly equal with 2EH it seems, but BCH is actually profitable to mine at this level, whilst BSV is 131.80% below what they'd be getting if they just mined BCH/BTC. Given that, they know long term they simply can't out-mine BCH while the prices stay at this level so they're probably moving hashpower back to BTC until BSV price warrants it (optimistically) or forever (pessimistically).
They really just got their asses kicked in this hashwar so bad it's embarrassing.

>>11896438
I dont even want the BCH ticker anymore. SV at scale will just be Bitcoin. in 10 years nobody will even remember Bitcoin used to be traded under BTC ticker

>>11896130

"1 terabyte blocks" --> translates as: "centralization"

was that the Official™ Satoshi™ Vision™ ?

>>11896889
What a boring fucking 'war'. You think if either side was as rich as they were boasting, they would pump the price of their coin and fight it out on coinmarketcap.
They don't because they are all bankrupt liars.
Sell POW, buy POS / DPOS. NANO IOTA EOS TRON ARK LSK

>>11896889
Yet, despite the loss becoming ever clearer, BCHSV price is being pumped right now. Weird.

>>11896575
>t. white knight

>>11896599
>If BSV actually worked at all
BSV is forked from ABC. Three months ago the ABC clients works just like the SV client works today. Are you saying BCH didn't work two months ago?

>>11896825
>within the last hour, only one SV block has been found. Something has happened.
No, it's just random. They have had few blocks lately for the same reason why it's always 10 minutes to the next block even when there hasn't been a block for 50 minutes.

>>11896939
As long as there are three miners the censorship-resistant nature of the system isn't threatened.

Bitcoin is never going to the next level by feeding some chickens on twitch. That stuff was something to get excited by 5 years ago. If it doesn't scale big now and get huge corporations it will all become worthless in 10 years. Outcompeted by VISA's fake crypto. Huge corporations won't on-board a system with 1 MB blocks or even 32 MB blocks. That's too little room to grow. And they won't on-board a system that isn't legal either.

CSW should abandon SV. And create another fork of BCHABC and start over with the hash war.

>>11897467
> My car worked just fine two months ago
> Yeah I welded a couple JATO engines to it in order to try break the sound barrier
> Are you saying it didn't work two months ago?
You fail at engineering.

>>11897720
ABC has changed a lot, SV has changed almost nothing.
BCH was about removing limits, not experiment further. Craig has a right to be upset.

>>11896939
"Decentralization" is a meme, politically driven by socialists and lolbertarians who believe in equality and muh freedoms

>>11897817
There's not even any mention of decentralization in the whitepaper, its an invented political meme

>>11897579
The goal isn't 32mb blocks. I get that people are anxious that the core situation should never be repeated, but the goal has --never-- from fork time been any less than the original vision for Bitcoin, global peer to peer electronic cash, immune to censoring and tampering, period.

>>11897776
Removing the speed limiter on your engine doesn't make your car go faster, get it? You actually have to do engineering work to make the machine operate more efficiently. Just saying "LETS GO BACK TO THE REAL THING AND REMOVE ALL THE LIMITS" doesn't get you anywhere. You're talking about software that hasn't even been optimised for local multicore processing of the transaction stream and you think it's just going to magically process unlimited blocks. That is simply not how this works. No matter how powerful the hardware in a node is, if the software is for shit, it will not accomplish anything, and that is the case.
Core never optimised for high volume on chain transactions, and why would they? They never planned on allowing them. So of course their software can't process high throughput on chain transactions, it shits itself at about 10mb throughput, which is exactly where BSV is presently dying despite upping limits and trying to solve the problem by throwing hardware at it.
Read and understand this graph. BSV *DOES NOT WORK* and will not work until optimisation is done at the software level, period. They ignorantly split the network because they're too retarded to understand this.

>>11897835
> not any mention of decentralisation
> title of the fucking whitepaper is peer to peer electronic cash
neck yourself.

>>11897931
>ctrl+f "decentralization"
>0 results
>ctrl+f "decentralisation"
>0 results

>>11896152
>>11896130
Fuck off craig

Now the FUD comes. Lol, pathetic

>>11897817
>until optimisation is done at the software level, period
Stop the bullshit, you shills are pathetic! CoinGeek is actually the single entity that has interest to fund parallelizability development and terabyte initiative. SV's aim is to remove scaling limits within a short time frame. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uf5Iz1xELzA DYOR!

>>11897964
peer to peer means decentralised you fucking brainlet blathering shitcock baka

>>11897978
That video is from terab shit for brains, I know it just from the cap without even watching it, and they precede BSV and coingeek both.
You're a transparent dickhead shill who has no idea what the fuck is going on.

>>11897915
>>11897817
>until optimisation is done at the software level, period
Stop the bullshit! CoinGeek is actually the single entity that has interest to fund parallelizability development and terabyte initiative. SV's aim is to remove scaling limits within a short time frame. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uf5Iz1xELzA DYOR!

>>11897964
>This adds an incentive for nodes to support the network, and provides a way to initially distribute coins into circulation, since there is no central authority to issue them.
This sentence literally implies decentralization by stating a coin minting mechanism in the absence of a centralized authority. Just because it doesn't use the word "decentralization" doesn't mean that it's not what it was intended to accomplish. Fucking idiot

>>11897996
Transparent shill is transparent. >>11897993 See your supervisor and have him dock you six rupees for cocking up rakesh.

>>11897993
Keep projecting s'oyboy faggot.
Im strong supporter of SV, you have no idea who you are fucking with.

>>11897978
?
>>11897985
Peer-to-peer
>computing
>involving sharing files or other resources between computers connected through a network, rather than using a central server (= a central computer that stores files)

>finance
>peer-to-peer lending involves the use of specialized websites that bring together suitable individual lenders and borrowers:

Decentralization
>the transfer of authority from central to local government.
>the movement of departments of a large organization away from a single administrative centre to other locations.

Try harder, sweetie.

>>11898034
Again, keep undermining us.
We need useful idiots like you.

>>11897964
>>11898058
Damn son, nChain really needs to hire a better class of shill. I know you people shit in the streets but you're not supposed to step in it.

>>11898079
You're doing a fine job of undermining yourselves. You don't need our help. But while you're at it if you want some pro-tips, simply keep shitposting here with that I know better than you attitude coupled with your abject shitheaded ignorance. Nothing could undermine you more effectively. You may as well be wearing investor repellent

>>11898050
I'm pretty sure he could probably guess the neighbourhood in mumbai by cross referencing the earnings and street shitting statistics to figure it out based on your idiocy there kumar.

>>11898029
That just explains that coins can be distributed because there is no one central authority to issue them. That's not the same as an egalitarian decentralized socialist utopia. Complete decentralization is Marxist bullshit, neck yourself for being such a commie faggot.

>>11898119
> I strawmanned you as an egalitarian decentralized socialist utopia.
> There's nothing in the whitepaper that implies an egalitarian decentralized socialist utopia.
> Therefore you're not following the whitepaper
There's a much easier solution there pajeet. Maybe you're just fucking stupid and don't understand practically nobody in the entire cryptosphere, letalone the more anarchocapitalist set of BCH'ers, is advocating for an egalitarian decentralized socialist utopia. Quite the opposite in fact. But that has nothing to do with the simple fact that the system was designed to be decentralised. Denying this just makes you look ignorant.

>>11898099
>imagine being this deluded
Keep taking those meds faggot.

>>11898058
What is it with these hilariously weak ass attempts to create a personality cult around faketoshi? Do you stupid fucks honestly think anyone looks at your pictures of him LARP'ing as if he were proficient and mature at anything at all convinces anyone at all of that, given the fact that when he opens his mouth in public literally all that comes out is gibberish and lies?

>>11898154
This guy clearly has some problems with different ethnicities and the white paper.
Miners Choice. If you dont like it, stiff!

>>11897915
>Removing the speed limiter on your engine doesn't make your car go faster, get it?

Are you retarded or what? Many motor bikes have a limiter that makes them go max 40km/hour. Doesn't removing that limiter make them go faster, brainlet?

>>11898216
> I don't know shit
Yes, pajeet. we know
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rev_limiter#Engine_damage_beyond_the_redline

>>11896075
how are so many people not watching what is going on?
Coingeek is reconfiguring their services for the next round of stress test after they gain data from continuous 32mb and one 64mb block.

Did you think this battle was about straightforward hash racing? The way to win is keep your chain alive while you scale bitcoin NOW. Make the two other token focused bitcoin chains look like the retail-level fraudsters they are while showing institutions and nation states that bitcoin is open for business.

>>11898239
How the fuck are they failing to understand this while their own network is disintegrating underneath them as a result of it? It's not like they tried to remove the limits and everything was just fine, they literally fucked themselves.

>>11898154
>designed to be decentralised
Only to a point, far short of the kind of Marxist faggotry you believe in.

>>11898250
You do that with proper engineering, not sperging out and waving your dick around about how you're going to do it and then utterly failing.

>>11898190
You're just jealous you're not getting all these Satoshi gainz.

>>11898261
There are no marxists in BCH fuckhead. Get a fucking grip.

>>11898239

Apparently 15 year old teenage boys are more technically literate than you because they manage to make their bikes go well over 60km/h after removing the limiter. If I were you I'd be so embarrassed that I'd kill myself. I highly recommend you do that so we might see a tiny bump on the global IQ statistics thanks to getting rid of your negative results.

BTC was already capable of doing more than 2Mb blocks before the artificial limiter was introduced.

>>11898273
srs pajeet you need to send me your shill farm business card we could use you to shill for boomer cunts with zero innate worth also.

>>11896141

He lost when he reorg'd his shitcoin. Everything after that is just dick measuring to see who has the deeper pockets.

>>11898292
> totally ignore the facts
> spew bullshit
Kill yourself pajeet.

>>11898267
>You do that with proper engineering, not sperging out and waving your dick around about how you're going to do it and then utterly failing.

It's the ABC cucks who caused it all. Who was it that wanted to introduce a hard fork? Tell me now, smart ass!

>>11898324
A hard fork that you very kindly proved necessary for them by demonstrating what happens when you just raise the limits without actually doing the required engineering work to make the chain function properly. So, congratulations on being the horrible example they needed you useless goofball cunt.

>>11898316
> totally ignore the facts
> spew bullshit

Why are you talking about yourself? Are you seriously brainlet enough to challenge the fact that 15 year old kids can make their bikes go faster by removing an artificial limiter?

Seriously, at least castrate yourself so we don't have to see more of such simpleminded shitheads like you. On the other hand never mind, no woman will want to handle such a disgusting personality as yourself and you're too poor to buy one.

>>11898250
bingo

>>11898292
Woooowzors!!!!111one
They removed a limiter in their shitty learner bikes to go a bit faster down a hill. Great comparison.

>>11898284
BABC is 100% controlled by China's Communist Party.
Roger and Amaury sold themself.

>>11897622

He could rope The Antantantwhateverhypeman into it.

Antman coin. SlimSatoshiCoin. Roger with SiaCoin. No, wait, that already exists

War of ants. Everybody pays for as many antminers as they can, and just turn them on.

>>11896599
long list of whiny faggy complaints, 0 facts. gtfo of here beta skeletor

>>11898348
>A hard fork that you very kindly proved necessary for them by demonstrating what happens when you just raise the limits without actually doing the required engineering work to make the chain function properly

What a way to demonstrate what an absolute brainlet you are. So it goes like this: Craig is moving on with his plan to make BTC scale without 2nd layer fractional reserve bullshit and then we have jackass Gavin and Brazzers Jihan decide they want to cuck themselves to core and fork off ABC before Craigs work is done. Then comes an absolute brainlet with ID of "m+soowbX" who blames whines and bitches about the SV (BTC) fork because "muh dey no have scaling muh just removing limiter" even though they had no choice but to fork it at that point.

You're genetically inferior and always will be. Please stay at Patna and don't procreate.

>>11897915
i know that the 32->128 block increase on SV didn't really serve a point. but im indifferent with the limit being increased as early as possible just so it isn't run into later when the system has been improved to handle regular blocks of that size. if nothing else it sends a message to clueless businessmen that they are all about scaling.

it still doesn't change that ABC has moved further away from bitcoin and SV is now the closest thing we have to the original. or as Roger would have put it, SV currently has the most bitcoin-ness to it.

the rumors about ABC implementing Avalance, which is apparently some kind of proof of stake thing, makes me glad that SV is still around as a backup plan. that 10 block auto-finalization thing on ABC felt really rushed.

>>11898365
> challenge the fact that 15 year old kids can make their bikes go faster by removing an artificial limiter?
This proves you don't actually know what we're talking about at all, and you're embarrassing yourself. Figure it out. Until then, fuck off bitch lasagna

>>11898273

>>11898380
>They removed a limiter in their shitty learner bikes to go a bit faster down a hill. Great comparison.

Imagine having this shitty personality that you can't even fucking concede that 15 year old kids can make their bikes go faster after removing a law mandated limiter. No wonder everyone has always hated you through your life. You're such a btich that you deserve to be ostracized.

>>11898430
> Craig is moving on with his plan to make BTC scale
By "moving on" you mean "demonstrably failing" you shit streeting pajeet fuckhead. Nobody cares about your bleating, shill harder, you just make yourself look worse.

>>11898467
Anon, do you even actually realise you're talking about a completely different device than they are in the analogy there, or are you out and out trying to shill for ABC by shilling extremely badly for SV? Because respect if so, I don't think I've ever seen such incompetent idiotic shilling in my entire life.

>>11898446
>im indifferent with the limit being increased as early as possible just so it isn't run into later when the system has been improved to handle regular blocks of that size.

And what better time to do this than this. Cucked Gavin and Brazzers Jihan were going to fork to fractional reserve anyways so why not raise the block limit while they tighten the noose around their necks. It's one less hard fork down the road to scaling.

>>11898446
None of that matters, because BSV flatly proved they're incompetent and not able to actually be stewards of the chain. Imagine you're running a business and thinking of entering the space and you see what happened at the BSV fork as a smoke test. You would never fucking touch them with a ten foot pole. >>11896599 is correct they failed as hard as it is possible to fail. They failed harder than fucking microsoft with windows ME.

>>11898451
>This proves you don't actually know what we're talking about at all, and you're embarrassing yourself. Figure it out. Until then, fuck off bitch lasagna

AHAHAHHAHHAA

Just imagine being this butthurt for being verifiably wrong and then having to defend your bullshit because your shitty personality can't handle a loss. I mean holy shit, you should have seen that there is something wrong with you after finding out everyone hates and avoids you but nooo, you just double down and bitch on the internet for your hurt feelings and childishness.

>>11898517
i wouldn't say they are incompetent or have failed

>>11898538
you're wrong dude and you're just making yourself look like more of an idiot every time you post missing the point again. give it up. go grab some papadums or whatever the fuck.

>>11898547
Then you would be incorrect.

>>11898574
you don't say?

>>11898497

>Removing the speed limiter on your engine doesn't make your car go faster, get it?

Sorry, but even wikipedia article proves this as bullshit. There are plenty of cases when the limiter is not there to protect the engine but to make it impossible for you to drive over certain speed. Hell nowdays even the owner can sometimes program the limiter.

This is simply false and probably the worst way to try and make a point because it's completely counter productive.

>>11898547
this. it's not over yet. not even close. this is like GW Bush claiming "mission accomplished" while troops are still getting blown to pieces in the middle east. it's truly brainlet tier to declare victory for either BCHABC or BSV

>>11898556
>you're wrong dude and you're just making yourself look like more of an idiot every time you post missing the point again

Are you stupid or what? I wasn't addressing your point. I was addressing your shit analogy that is provably false yet you can't simply correct yourself like any sane person would but instead go full retard because you can't handle being wrong. There is something seriously wrong with you and I recommend shutting down the computer and trying to adapt to the real world again.

chances are coingeek don't wanna have 51% hashpower because that makes it centralized

>miners
so 2009

>>11898779
>scam with no consensus and market selling and unlimited minting with a command
worse then bitconnect

>>11898661
wow, doesn't even realise he's responding to tons of different people telling him he's retarded. even pajeets know better than this. is it possible SVtards are actually earnest in their idiocy? fucking amazing.

>>11898599
yeah larping as if this is 7d chess given how bad they failed is just making you look silly.

>>11898832
When all you have is bluffs, all you can do is bluff.

>>11898644
Why do you think this stupid thing, anon?

>>11898832
it doesn't matter, either nChain will prove themselves in 2019 or they will fade away. declaring ABC winners after not even two weeks is silly, especially since SV is still mining. they are clearly serious. i think it's funny that everybody complaining that craig never delivers anything keep complaining even after when he actually did follow through with the SV client and were able to deliver a lot more hashpower than many thought he would.

>>11899188
https://www.crypto51.app/
A lot of shitcoins are still issuing blocks and have been for years and will likely to continue to. If your standard for "victory" is "we're still issuing blocks" that's an extremely low barrier to pass, especially since unlike SV threatening ABC and trying to force them not to split, nobody ever threatened SV or even cared that they forked off.
The war is over in the Clausewitz sense, because BCH stakeholders clearly demonstrated their ability to summon more hashpower in order to defend their chain from an opposing force, as well as added new features that make opposing hashpower less threatening in future. Recall "war is simply a continuation of political intercourse, with the addition of other means" SV now has zero means to actually pursue its political objectives, which were clearly stated at the outset; no split, and punishing ABC for attempting to split, as well as blockading their trade routes. That failed completely and there's no changing it. It doesn't matter even --if-- SV did get the most accumulated work on the chain anymore, it would bring them no closer to their political objectives, and even that actually happening looks less likely every day.

>>11899263
it's not like they have an atari sitting somewhere adding blocks to the chain, they have near the same accumulated proof of work as ABC. and no they haven't failed completely which ever way you look at it. if they had failed we wouldn't even be talking about them now.

>>11899352
We're talking about them because they failed, there is nothing but evidence that they failed, and the only response to this is literally "Well you're still talking about them and they still exist, so clearly they didn't fail" even though nobody is trying to stop either of those things. Anyway, it's clear you have nothing to actually offer beyond "is not" and "muh 7d chess" so really it's just more of the same nChain bleating, which is fine, a man has to make his rupees and whatnot so by all means continue just bought 100k.

>>11899413
you really need to drop the 7d chess thing my friend, you use the phrase way too much.

doesn't matter anyway. we'll see what they deliver in 2019, just don't make the mistake to think BCH is "rid of craig" or something like that

>>11899459
You might find people using it a lot because it's literally the only play in the BSV book. That's pretty much your problem, not the people accurately describing your behaviour.

>>11899459
> just don't make the mistake to think BCH is "rid of craig" or
That's not a mistake, it's a fact, and one of the upsides of this silly war. He absolutely destroyed all credibility outside his small cult of BSV followers.

>>11896152
1) isnt this market manipulation
2) isnt market manipulation illegal

>>11899506
i still dont understand why ABC people find the original bitcoin so bad all of a sudden

>>11899521
you're making the mistake bro, i told you

t. abcminers/reddit/roger

>>11899556
Because a demonstrably failing shitcoin that broke nakamoto consensus by trying to force changes that were idiotic even before they demonstrably failed is not Bitcoin. And it doesn't matter if faketoshi is championing it, or people believe otherwise.
> you're making the mistake bro, i told you
It's not a mistake. Quit your bleating.

>>11899585
>bleating
>(of a sheep, goat, or calf) make a characteristic wavering cry.
i learned a new word, you should use it more instead of the phrase "7d chess"

and i still believe in bitcoin, thank you very much

>>11899625
Yes, like Muslims still believe in peace.

>>11899652
hey now don't compare bitcoin with the religion of piss

>>11898365
>bike goes to 80
>limiter sets 40
>remove limiter
>bike goes faster

>>11899795
Christ as a mechanic this thread is fucking painful to watch.
THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT DEVICES IS WHAT EVERYONE HAS BEEN TRYING TO TELL YOU

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limiter

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rev_limiter

>>11898502
Why do you keep calling him brazzers jihan? Just wondering

>>11896152
Hey Craig.

>>11900502

>>11897579
It’s called Social scalability. Bitcoin is highly inefficient for a reason or satoshi wouldn’t have sacrificed so much speed for security in the first place. Everyone rushes to the conclusion you should be able to buy coffee with bitcoin. This doesn’t even make sense when there’s Austrian economic policy engrained into the code. Bitcoin network is a monetary system and a bitcoin is the highly powered MoE.

>>11898884

>>11902686
but satoshi was clear about it being able to scale as is, aka on chain