/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>15977121
Based I’m already a neet, I will never work a day in my life again. 20 years from now I’ll have a team of wagies doing my bidding for just a few satojs per hour

>>15977121
Um. You can use kucoin for bsv man...

>>15977428
BCHSV?

>>15977532
Yes.

Also you forgot:
Stealthex
Changelly
Centbee
RelayX

Good fomo though. BSV had potential.

>>15977121
Nice FUD, the reality is Craig is a con man and his shitcoin is destined to fail. Sure it moves with BTC for now but pretty soon it's ok to tank to 0 and all of the cultists are going to be left holding a hefty bag.

>>15977121
>the only way to get BSV in the future is by being productive by using apps/means to earn. Hence, proof of work.
Yeah, I don't think that means what you think it means.

Also, that silly definition sounds like something creg would say. As is:
>I don't know the exact date or details
Like the lines he kept using in the court proceedings.

All this post needed was a rare creg as OP pic and you'd have convinced me you were creg posting on biz again, as he usually does.

>>15977581
Bsv is hated by guys like you... Despised even, and yet: it is still there...it is nagging you and taking away your sanity, how can all these Anon be so delusional, what do they see in this fraudulent coin.....you are making the wrong questions...the question is why does bsv bother you that much? There are miriads of other coins that you wouldn't spend a single second on trying to warn anons about, but you go into bsv threads and talk shit about bsv....Anon, I ask you, if bsv will fail, why do you care?

>>15977121
I own 160 cities on chain will i make it?

>>15977121
brock pierce created tether, and was epstein's buddy. he even went to the island. all these fucks are going to prison
>Brock Pierce
>founded Tether
>caught up in a Hollywood pedophile ring scandal
>known to rub shoulders with convicted pedophile Jeffery Epstein
>active member of the Clinton Global Initiative
>received millions of dollars of investments from Goldman Sachs

>>15977133
youre gonna be super rich congrats anon you're going to make it, youve already made it.

>>15978634
Thanks I got some cash on the sidelines too trying to get another 2-300 before 2020, just waiting and watching to see what king shitcoin will do trying to maximize the amount I can get

>>15977581
this.
bsv can lure in newfags but over time theg figure just like everyone else what a masive liability craig is.

it would be already tough for bsv to compete without hin but craig kills the coin for good with his behaviour and idiotic 'vision' which basically states 1+1=3.

>>15978634
>youre gonna be super rich congrats anon you're going to make it, youve already made it.
lmao how many times have I heard this delusion with varoius shitcoins. look where theyre at now. BUT THIS TIME ITS DIFFERENT I SWEAR!

>>15977121
wait what shitcoins like sv will die? and so you can't buy them anymore at exchanges?

>>15978630
the honey badger doesn't give a fuck there is no scenario where btc will lose to sv. unless satoshi shows up and declares it his true vision... but chances of that are slim to none. satoshi preferring a minority fork of a minority fork is unthinkable.

what's more likely is he could finally whip the btc devs in marching order and start doing consensus hardforks again for organic scaling.

>>15977133
Based

Why use BTC if BSV have low fee and big block? Blockstream kill BTC with stiupid 1mb meme block limit.

>>15979578
>Why use BTC
because it's the only true crypto that simple. it's the only one with the properties that define true crypto.

as for the 1mb hard limit being bad we will see very clearly after the next halving. i think btc hardforks are impossible unless there is a pressing need. if there is however the community will stand together consensus will be reached and actions taken. btc will increase the block size the only question is when. if lightning gains any real adoption then it's possible a few more years can pass without bothering it because dirt transactions (even small amounts to and from exchanges) will be going off-chain. even if people open direct channels to exchanges and ignore the lightning mesh completely it will possibly halve the btc transactions. won't happen all at once tho obviously.

>>15979621
>because it's the only true crypto that simple.
So it's purely based on faith?

>it's the only one with the properties that define true crypto.
There's nothing BTC does that is better than BSV

>btc will increase the block size the only question is when
No-one at Blockstream wants to raise it, some even want to reduce it to 300kb

Even if the BTC blocksize doubled to 2mb, it's absolutely pathetic, BSV can already handle blocks that are hundreds of megabytes and next year we will see gigabyte blocks

>>15979674
>So it's purely based on faith?
no on fundamental properties

>>15979693

>>15979674
>No-one at Blockstream wants to raise it
overestimate their importance m8.

you think big blocks are good but they are not. organic growth with real tx throughput is the right path. right now less than 40% of bitcoin tx-es are actual transactions done by users. rest is mostly spam and idiotic parasitic bullshit.

to keep this in check the block space must have some scarcity. not too much not too little.

>>15979695
that's a technical detail that obviously changed, the fundamental properties of crypto are
>trustless
>permissionless
>publicly auditable
>secure

the publicly auditable part is controversial of course, and we had some examples why it is a bad idea to give it up if you remember ""bitcoin private"" and hidden inflation attack... the coinbase has to be publicly auditable. no way around that.

>>15979711
>t. retard.

>>15979711
We all know you are a paid Blockstream shill. They were created specifically to hijack Bitcoin and sabotage network growth.

It is factual history, and anyone denying it immediately outs themselves as a paid propagandist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BZoKH-hX_o

>>15979717
something is wrong with your chart
https://www.blockchain.com/charts/n-transactions-per-block?timespan=all
bear markets result in fewer transactions it has happened before. interest is lost it will pick up.

>>15979722
bullshit and the market cap of alts is a mirage that crumbles ten times faster than bitcoin ever could.
also as you can see we are near peak tx count and the mempool is doing all right
https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#0,all
this is due to limited segwit adoption alone.

you are too hasty trying to bury bitcoin. just wait and see.

that all aside i agree block limit should have been increased to 4mb already. but that's not my point here. the point is bitcoin is doing fine, hash is at ath despite the price taking a 40% hit. looking good.

I've done a ton of research on BSV

The only scaling problem BitCoin has is the unoptimised software, it was originally coded to be singled threaded, back in the day people used to think that CPU cores would continue to increase in speed as they did in the past but there is a heat bottleneck which was bypassed by CPU manufacturers adding more cores, sidenote: this is why Planetside 2 is so unoptimised on modern machines.

The BitCoin software before broadcasting the block processes each transaction on a single CPU thread, the software for doing this hadn't been improved for many years. Improving and optimising the software is very costly and takes a lot of time, Craig has been doing this with nChain at great expense. Previously the software would just crash when trying to process large blocks but the fact we have seen blocks as big as 500mb is proof this bottleneck has been almost removed, once it is finally gone there is no limit to how big blocks can be, I think Craig is aiming for this to be complete by Februrary 2020 which when the block cap will be removed entirely.

>>15979716
Bitcoin: A peer to peer electronic Cash system

https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

>>15979760
>The only scaling problem BitCoin has is the unoptimised software
no the only scaling problem it has is 2gb blocks would not propagate right on current internet infrastructure and would fill up 105 terabytes in a year.

organic growth means doubling the blocksize with each halving. not going full retard on an already full retard chain. of course you could in theory let miners dictate the growth without limiting it from software, but this approach only works in bitcoin not it's shitforks with laughable hash.

>>15979744
>you are too hasty trying to bury bitcoin. just wait and see.

Not at all, I believe fully in Bitcoin. But I also know that BTC stopped being Bitcoin the moment they implemented SegWit.

Bitcoin is an economic protocol described in the Bitcoin white paper. BTC is not that - it's Blockstream coin.

>>15979767
don't worry m8 you will get it one day. cashies (especially curry-cashies) are obnoxious retards. but the market will sort it all out.

>>15977121
BSV would have to first be fully listed on an exchange in order for people to use it, anon.

>>15979779
>But I also know that BTC stopped being Bitcoin the moment they implemented SegWit.
hahahaha no
>Bitcoin is an economic protocol described in the Bitcoin white paper. BTC is not that
says you and a handful of contrarians, the markets priced in the potential of the shitforks it's basically tidal locked to bitcoin in hashrate ratio.

Not raising the blocksize was intentional sabotage of Bitcoin's organic growth.

>>15979760
Why no other crypto can compete with BSV:

The software bottleneck is a massive hurdle other cryptos simply dont have the will or resources to overcome

BTC: No will or desire to scale. Blockstream literally has ties to mastercard, big banks and the federal reserve, they don't want BitCoin to scale and propagandise the idea of "Store of value" to the brainwashed BTC community

BCH: Lack of resources, BCHABC is the much weaker fork of BCH, they would like to scale but don't have the money to hire developers to actually do the work. They have had to crowdfund to get money to hire a few developers, the fact that they have no increased the blocksize past 32mb shows they have made little progress. Even if they have made a little progress it is at a rate much slower than BSV.

Blockstream vision.

Blockstream = Block The Stream

The name itself is a taunt.

None of them believe in Bitcoin - they all represent the existing financial system, which a scaling Bitcoin is in direct competition with.

They don't make a secret of it, but depend on the goyim to not pay attention and be easily led by false narratives.

>>15979794
bit old that pic ain't it?
right now the witness part is about 40% of a block and it can grow still.
if you zoom out you can see that the block limit indeed cut off the peak of the 2017 bubble but we are still on tract for linear growth from 2012 and 2013.

Such that Bitcoin was always intended to be crippled by a 1MB block limit. It couldn't be further from the truth. The limit was put in place in very early days when the network was small to prevent large actors from attacking the network. It was always meant to be remove to scale with demand.

>>15979817
They had to hire paid liars like this guy to keep the false narratives alive. They depend on information control, which is why they took over moderator positions on all the biggest crypto discussion fora.

>>15979795
>BTC: No will or desire to scale.
blatantly false
>BCHABC is the much weaker fork of BCH, they would like to scale but don't have the money to hire developers to actually do the work
are you fucking retarded? bch got about 10 times the actual work done on the protocol than sv. while sv devs fuck around with peripheral apps that make no sense.

i get it it stems from the philosophy differences but come on...

They admit to having teams of sockpuppets to keep the narrative alive.

Boards like /biz/ is infested with them.

>>15979778
>no the only scaling problem it has is 2gb blocks would not propagate right on current internet infrastructure

2GB in 10 minutes is 3.33mb/s, that's almost nothing, think about the servers that run Facebook and Google and what they have to handle

>and would fill up 105 terabytes in a year

That's about £3630 per year which is a tiny cost for miners that will make millions in revenue

>organic growth means doubling the blocksize with each halving

The halving dates are arbitrary

>>15979822
>the false narratives
which is everything you don't like? brainlet.
from where i stand the objectively false narrative is claiming a minority hash network can be the real bitcoin in any way.

They are the same people behind Tether, which is fake money they print to keep the BTC scam afloat. They know price is the strongest argument for the ignorant, so pump and dumping their own coin with fake money is the perfect way to keep gamblers and retards attention fixated on their crippled technology.

>>15979841
>we define a coin as a chain of digital signatures
>segwit

>>15979834
>2GB in 10 minutes
that doesn't work you have to propagate blocks much faster than that, also if it takes 10 minutes between each node it will take hours to propagate the entire network. stupidest shit i ever heard. no that would be zero conf.

>>15979849
>what is bip16 p2sh?
segwit changed almost nothing. it was an ill conceived thing to do it as a soft fork and we can thank that retarded lukejr for it. but ultimately segwit is inconsequential as to what bitcoin is or not.

>>15979829
>blatantly false

Then why is the BTC blocksize still 1mb? Its been 9 years

>are you fucking retarded? bch got about 10 times the actual work done on the protocol than sv

Constantly changing the base protocol = nothing can be built on it

>>15979841
The real Bitcoin is a protocol described in the white paper.

BTC is not the Bitcoin protocol, so it can't be the majority hash Bitcoin chain.

It's the majority hash SegWit coin. You are fraudulently claiming to be Bitcoin when you are not.

Blockstream ordering you not to FUD Tether - because their false "store-of-value coin" narrative depends on fake money keeping the network afloat despite its crippled tech.

Pooftoshi aside, BSV is a pretty inferior chain on its own merits. It's inferior not only to first-league projects, but also to every fad of the day like Holochain, Harmony, Fantom etc.

The ideology of BSV is "let's use our chain as a pastebin for third-party servers". BSV has several prototypes for tokens, smart contracts, data storage etc. All of them rely on external servers validating user data on the blockchain. Obviously, all servers are centrally controlled, can be shut down or hacked at any time. Wallet usernames? Owned by site owners. What about online micropayments? Let's use a centralized web site too.

This is an inferior pajeet approach. Such things are supposed to be done onchain.

Combined with the fact that BSV is run by literal scammers and sodomites, including veteran of illegal gambling Calvin Ayre and Californian LGBT lawyer Jimmy Nguyen, this is pretty much the Untermensch Coin. I'm surprised /biz/ has enough of its holders.

They celebrate and cherish exorbitant fees, that nobody is ever going to use.

They cherish their own sabotage. It tells you their real intentions.

Blockstream was a builderberg/CIA engineered takeover of Bitcoin.

And the stupid goyim still falls for it like the useful idiots they are.

Central planners gonna central plan.

>>15979892

I have said this all along. ALL of Craig's haters, every single one of them, know that he is Satoshi. They admit it in private. Yes, even people like Greg Maxwell, Adam Back, Roger Ver, Mcafee, CZ, Vitalik, McCormack and all the other crypto clowns.

They only fight him because they now realize that Satoshi was NOT a cypherpunk. Or an Ancap. Or a mysterious Japanese futurist - he was in fact a Cop. A forensic expert. A genius economist, technologist and intelligence contractor for the NSA, for Interpol and for Australian Federal police who worked to stop CRIME of all of the worst kinds. Money launderers, child pornographers, drug lords, cybercriminals and terrorists.

That is WHY they hate him. Craig a.k.a Satoshi created Bitcoin to be the most traceable and honest money system ever invented, to stop crime and fraud above all else. A public ledger of honest money - An attempt to free humanity from organized criminal cartels and corruption.

Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin was a POLICEMAN. It is beautifully poetic if you think about it. Now THAT is why the COPE from all the criminals who flocked to crypto as their safe haven is off the charts.

Are you paying attention yet?

"Bitcoin Core Dev "Luke-jr" can't answer why he is interested in Bitcoin."

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YepHOb9huY

>>15979870
>Then why is the BTC blocksize still 1mb?
not because there is no intention to scale it for sure. there are different scaling strategies then just increase the block size and make the blockchain growth untenable.

my frustration is also very strong in this matter tho. i'm a small blocker by heart but not THAT small. and i don't believe for a second this is malice rather than incompetence and fear.

>Constantly changing the base protocol
it's funny coming from you sv cucks because the blockstream approach is also locking in the base protocol and building layers on top of it.

>>15979871
>The real Bitcoin is a protocol described in the white paper.
yes and the white paper is quiet clear about how a minority fork can never be the real bitcoin. don't think satoshi left anything up for interpretation there.

>>15979941
lukejr is a flat earther christian fundamentalist retard. there are 600 other bitcoin devs many of them probably also mentally ill but most is fine.

Their goal was never to scale and improve Bitcoin. Their goal was to cripple it and, if possible, also make money off of its now engineered shortcomings.

Problem - Reaction - Solution.

"Samson Mow - Blockstream's goal is to generate profit and revenue, not to increase the value of Bitcoin."

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFOmUm-_DMQ

>>15979967
hmm. yeah, gavin would still be lead dev if he stays out of the craig nonsense. what a fuck up...

got to go to work will be back from an other id.

>>15979961
You are ignoring the inescapable fact that BTC is no longer Bitcoin, therefore it can't be the majority hash Bitcoin chain.

It's the majority hash SegWit chain, which is not described anywhere in the white paper. So not Bitcoin.

>>15979965
The Blockstream/Tether connection is obvious to anyone with eyes to see.

Their motivations are hidden in plain sight, while you are distracted by the price going up and down and their army of shills creating fake hype on social media.

Like a good little subject. Moon! Lambo! HODL! You are going to be rich! they say.

They promise you the world while they have control over the market and the development. It's the most advanced ponzi scheme ever devised.

>>15979789
BTC is The Fork of the real BTC and BSV is the real Satoshis vision thus the real Bitcoin>
t. Comes from a guy who doesn't own any bsv and trading btc but that's gonna change soon.
BTC is fucked and centralised LN will never work. The fuck is wrong with you?

>>15979998
>You are ignoring the inescapable fact
according to you cucks only
everyone else on this planet is fully aware that btc is bitcoin
majority hash is the consequence of majority users and deeper consensus. the miners are a power but not the only power they are hostages to the market just the same.

>>15980153
>everyone else on this planet is fully aware that btc is bitcoin

Appeal to popularity - blockstream socially engineered narratives i.e. bandwagon fallacy.

This is an important moment - your strongest argument is

"Everyone who knows nothing about crypto history or technical merits believes this is true - therefore it must be true!"

If you repeat a lie a thousand times...

>>15977121
>I'm with him

>>15980183
>Appeal to popularity
consensus nigger

>>15980266
Only a Jew would think that truth and consensus it the same thing.

>>15980290
bitcoin is consensus the only truth it knows is consensus if a fraudulent chain with double spend is the longest for bitcoin it is truth. fucking cashies never learn.

>>15977121
>regulation is coming
if it was regulated, you bsv cunts be in jail
I don't care if you believe me or not, I don't have time to convince you. But bsv cunts should all be jailed
>muh double your money $1200 EOY
scammers like these are literally why we can't have nice things, sans regulation

>>15980323
>bitcoin is consensus the only truth it knows is consensus

No it's not. You don't get to make up your own definition of things. Saying the same lie over and over again doesn't make it true. Bitcoin is a protocol described in the Bitcoin white paper. It is a technical document describing the workings of the Bitcoin system.

>>15980347
The fuck is wrong with you jew loving cucks? It's simple, BTC is tamed by blockstream. Fuck your consensus nigger. What's important is that it won't be another way for jews to fuck monetary system. Right now your so called BTC is LITERALLY OWNED BY JEWS.

>>15980290
Based anon you’re doing God’s work we will kick the money changers out of crypto

>>15980638
>No it's not.
how stupid you have to be to say that?

>>15979621
man youre a dumbass.
>chain of digital signatures
segwit broke the chain. it's not bitcoin.

>>15979716
so where is this 'crypto whitepaper' that defines crypto genius? oh thats right there is only a bitcoin whitepaper and thousands of shitcoin scams.

>>15979778
>putting an arbitrary cap on blocksize is organic growth.

>>15980928
bullshit

>>15980901

>>15980028
they have as much control as you let them

>>15978419
It was hype when it first came out but then it did nothing. Why would people still be holding this? It's like holding bch. No point at all. Will only moon if the whole market does and then it doesn't matter what you hold.

>>15979892
germans are subhumans

>>15980870
>Fuck your consensus nigger.
typical cashie attitude

>>15979744
>i agree block limit should have been increased to 4mb already
There's no reason to hard fork and in 5 years all these retards will want smaller blocks anyway while claiming that's what they always wanted. We had this debate in 2013 so we made Dogecoin, just use that.

>>15977581
>FUD
you obviously don't know what this means and are just repeating shit you've heard here

>>15981278
>he thinks social consensus is consensus
keep running your useless node that doesnt produce any blocks kek

>>15981278
Exactly as I expected. What did you think, I write this illogically just for nothing? You got lured you jew piece of shit. Use this as an argument in a debate about blockchain technology? Low intelligence sheep, liberal globalists, muh holocaust argumentalist. Now everybody can see, just look this pathetic imbecile trying to win a debate with unethical quilting. Alluh Akbar fuckface, go bite a babys wiener.

>>15981419
bitcoin is literally worthless without social consensus. social consensus determines demand. consensus on the code that run consensus on the price via market price discovery consensus on what you call bitcoin and consensus by the miners it's all tied together.

consensus. that is what bitcoin is. you can wail you can flail like a little baby you can curse the blockstream jews and whomever you want you can't change this. there is nothing you can do about it. you can delude yourself all you want nobody buys your bullshit. btc is bitcoin.

>>15981426
you need to take your meds m8. you need them.

>>15981561
i wonder what happens if all miners move off your chain. will all your social consensus nodes be producing blocks? miners are in it for profit, dont think they have any allegiance to any chain tardo

>>15981619
>i wonder what happens if all miners move off your chain.
what if? what if aliens come and claim earth? what if they steal all our women for sex slaves and pump the atmosphere chock full of radiation with their drives? what then?

>>15981665
>he doesnt realize how much hashpower calvin has
kek

>>15981619
>miners are in it for profit
also no shit sherlock. and their profit also comes from consensus. consensus about what is bitcoin and it's value. you can't seriously be unable to comprehend this.

>>15977121
Jesus Christ this shit thread is still here

>>15981687
he has about 2% of btc total hash.

>>15981713
keep telling yourself that

>>15981713
remember when like 40% of btc hash disappeared in a day like 2 weeks ago?
remember how that was at the exact same time as the Kazak government had emergency maintenance on their power grid in the area of Coingeek's farm there?

>>15981722
probably not even controlling all that. otherewise how come sv has absolutely no hashrate?

>>15981722
>>15981738
rofl, you niggas seriously believe this bullshit?

>>15981696
STIFF

>>15981570

>>15979760
I've heard that optimising BitCoin software for big blocks is less of a money problem and more of a time problem. As in you can't throw dozens of devs at the problem and expect to fix it in any time quicker than 4 devs could, even though you increase the number of total work hours over a certain time span. Is this because it is specialized work you cannot delegate across multiple people? This explanation doesn't satisfy me for some reason. If it's even true, but I remember it coming from a credible source.

>>15982073
I'm not a programmer but I guess it's one of those things you can't rush

>>15982073
never seen a software project where simply throwing double the manpower on a problem halved the dev time instead of increase it.

>>15982073
btw i faintly recall you could specify the number of threads used in the sigscript validating code. so partially it is parallelized.

bitcoin first validates the inputs and outputs of the transactions and only then starts validating sig scripts.

>>15982197
or in their case executing them really

>>15982179
Makes sense
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks%27s_law

>>15977121
didn't read but image related

hop in

Thread is full of redpills, don't let it die bros. Let it hang here for a while to make the blockstream shills seethe.

>>15983343
Blockstream is crap, I got it. How does another scam company make it better? BSV and nChain are literally the same shit as Blockstream, if not worse, we need something better.

>>15983365
if the protocol is locked down,
there is no power in the protocol.

ITT: garbage arguments. Governments don't need bitcoin in either BTC or BSV forms. "Bitcoin must save us from government fraud": if, purely hypothetically, governments adopted bitcoin for transactions, they're still be in charge of identities that must be attached to transactions, which means we wouldn't be free from fraud.

"Banks crippled bitcoin because they're afraid of its scaling". Bitcoin scaling is not a threat to the global financial system because it's easy to outlaw retail use of bitcoin (i.e. to accept it in stores) as well as in online stores. Informal transactions are not different from what we have now.

What a stupid thread full of garbage arguments.

>>15983539
We won't be free of corruption ipso facto, but there will always be evidence. Imagine the current system, except that data couldn't be shredded and the books are open to everybody. That is a good deal.

>>15983539
>t. Blockstream

>>15983655
You already have these guys:

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

With alternatives in every country:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_intelligence

They seem to be doing fine monitoring existing transactions.

Adoption of bitcoin would actually make the job of FinCEN much harder because bitcoin transactions are not attached to real identities by default, unlike traditional banking transactions.

Bitcoin as a payment system, with big blocks or not, is easy to ban in retail too.

So, BSV followers say that they want to help FinCEN monitor financial transactions better by using BSV. Does FinCEN really need their help?

>>15983365
>we need something better
bitcoin unlimited tried to be better
they failed

Go back to Twitter, Kevin Pham

I fomo'd
fuck..

>>15979500
>devs
>consensus

Congrats on being the cancer killing crypto.

>>15979711
>pay for transaction
>its spam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOzvQ1wOV2g

>>15983764
So you are against making things better?

Don't you agree that having an immutable trail which leads to child pornographers and terrorists if and when they are caught and being prosecuted? Or did you spend bitcoin in an illegal way?

How much longer until the pink line crosses the orange line?

Shilling bsv is pretty nigger tier

>>15979829
>work done on the protocol
There's nothing wrong with the protocol. Build on top of it, niggerboi.

>>15984011
I believe FinCEN is already doing its job fine.

>>15979859
>bip16 p2sh
FUCK YOU NIGGER. YOU BRING THIS SHIT UP ALL THE TIME AND ARE ALWAYS BTFO

P2SH IS NOTHING LIKE SEGWIT KYS IMMEDIATELY

>>15983970
>>pay for transaction
>>its spam
They're communists. The funny thing is many of them don't realize it themselves. What they do is exactly what a communist government does.

>Commie government:
Hey farmer, yeah you! You are not allowed to sell this many potatoes. If you sell more than your quota you take away sales and profit from that retarded hobby farmer next door. We can't have that can we?

>Commie devs
Hey miner, yeah you! You can't sell that many transactions, you will out compete and bring out of business the granny next door with her 15 year old laptop. You know we can't have that, everyone. No one left behind

The Bitcoin Whitepaper belongs to BSV

What is BTC's white paper?

>>15983949
devs are obviously an important part of consensus. users and miners can only decide to use what the devs make.
>>15983970
it's spam if it's not financial transaction.
if spam is too cheap you can't fight it. it's impossible. if it's expensive it goes away on it's own.
>There's nothing wrong with the protocol. Build on top of it, niggerboi.
that's the blockstream argument tho.
>>15984046
segwit is just p2sh to the pre-fork protocol why are you willfully retarded? you claim segwit ruined everything in 2017 but it's literally just anyone can spend p2sh address used by the miners however the fuck they wish... it's all according to bitcoin protocol back to 2012.

>>15983992
Probably Blockstreams Lightning Network patent. Which by the way they do NOT intend to let people use for free, unlike Craig will with his patents as long as you build on the original Bitcoin (BSV)

>>15984085
>devs are obviously an important part of consensus
See hashpower.

>it's spam
You clearly have no idea what spam is.

>that's the blockstream argument tho.
>segwit

>segwit is just p2sh
It's not, you're a fucking idiot. Just because they had to make Segwit compatible with p2sh doesn't make them the same, you absolute gorilla nigger.

Not letting this die.
Fuck jews

>>15984106
>See hashpower
hashpower can only vote on the devs work
>You clearly have no idea what spam is.
imbecile, if it's not a bitcoin transaction for the sake of transacting value on the blockchain it's spam. this includes parasitic blockchains and retards doing graffiti. but sure, if they pay the price they can go ahead i'm not saying we should or can block them. i'm saying they will have to pay the fucking price. and it will be steep enough to discourage spam.
>Just because they had to make Segwit compatible with p2sh doesn't make them the same, you absolute gorilla nigger.
segwit is literally a p2sh address with a special stricter consensus rule built upon the base protocol layer. like you fags always say thing should be. to old nodes not knowing this extra rule it's just p2sh completely valid in any way it's spent.

>>15984144
>f it's not a bitcoin transaction for the sake of transacting value
>only I dictate what is valuable
Commies get the rope.

>segwit is literally a p2sh address
and your true retard is shows. Remember what I said about compatibility?

>>15984144
>24 post by this ID
How much are they paying you?
Your time is up. Here comes light.

>>15984164
you can wail you can flail you can't change facts. facts that are easily proven. segwit never changed the nature of bitcoin it's also an opt-in feature built on the base protocol layer which you are not forced to use. in fact i never did. so fuck right off! btc is the only valid bitcoin chain the only one compatible with the pre-2016 bitcoin nodes. you fork off you can fork right off from the mantle!

>>15984166
>Here comes light.
bring it bitch! then entire fucking sv crowd has a single valid argument. but all their conclusions are still false.

>>15984558
>segwit never changed the nature of bitcoin
uh sweetie have you heard of bitcoin being a chain of digital signatures? its in this funny document called the whitepaper. segwit breaks that chain

>>15984572
>uh sweetie have you heard of bitcoin being a chain of digital signatures?
bitch where you not paying attention? bip16 threw that out the window.

pay to script hash, not pubkey hash: script hash! you argument is invalid.

>>15984558
>segwit never changed the nature of bitcoin
This is incredible. What are you going to claim next, that ash is the same as a tree?

>>15984651
i feel sorry for you i truly am must be hard to live with a cognitive disability.

>>15984617
>pay to script hash, not pubkey hash: script hash! you argument is invalid.
literal technobabble kek

>>15984812
...
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Pay_to_script_hash
To spend bitcoins sent via P2SH, the recipient must provide a script matching the script hash and data which makes the script evaluate to true.
>technobabble
is this peak dunning-kruger?

>>15984558
>doesn't refute anything
>reeees harder

p2sh is da saym as segwit hurrrrrrrrrrrr

>>15984850
OH NO NO NO

>>15984073
Toilet paper

>>15984859
i truly pity you brainlets.
>>15984906
i'm fully aware of and respect peter rizuns stance on segwit and he makes sense. he is just ultimately wrong in the path he took. and i'm not sure what he describes ever becomes a real problem either. theoretically could sure. we will see.

>>15985200
>i'm not sure what he describes ever becomes a real problem either
doesnt matter what you think it breaks the chain of signatures as described in the whitepaper. stiff bickies sweetie

>>15985233
>it breaks the chain of signatures as described in the whitepaper
first of all only like 10% of the transactions are segwit, so even (and this is of course absurd) if "segwit coins" were not the same as bitcoins over 90% of the addresses are still p2pk and p2pkh addresses. and segwit does nothing to those transactions. so this is one crucial point you cucks ultimately fall on your face. those transactions done on non-segwit addresses are still 100% legal under the old bitcoin ruleset and also in the essence of the whitepaper. meanwhile the transactions done on the shitforks are close to 100% illegal (not sure how many non-split coins left how much replay is still going on).

truly you fucked up. bad. you ate craigs diarrhea and try to pretend it's honey.

i'm not sure who are you trying to convince of your stupid shit or just regurgitating it to calm your nerves. we are not buying it.

>>15985326
>first of all only like 10% of the transactions are segwit
>only 10% the area is landmines

>>15985413
if you wish to see it that way. i really don't give a fuck. segwit is nothing to me but a curiosity. i don't like it i don't use it. it's kind of amazing and disgusting at the same time.

but again claiming that bip16 did not fundamentally and irrevocably change the nature of bitcoin forever but fucking bip141 did is absolute brainlet tier.

>>15985413
so segwit is not a scaling solution?
is lightning were your hat is?

>>15985528
>so segwit is not a scaling solution?
no its a stepping stone worthless in itself

>>15985678
how dumb

>>15986369
segwit only solves one thing: transaction malleability. this thing about freeing up blockspace is a sideffect of the soft fork that may do more harm than good: see >>15984572 and similar retard using it a justification for their perverted agenda.
segwit could have been done with a hardfork where the block (and block hash) includes the witness or at least a merkle root of the witness.
something however that could have easily backfired and resulted on an unintended chain split.

>>15985473
Check this and thank me later

https://pastebin.com/uEGFkJAp

>>15986499
https://pastebin.com/fSCY344F

thank you anon

>>15977121
cope

i want 1000 bsv

>>15986620
Holy shit you are still posting here. You getting paid extra hours?
BTC is a scam