/biz/ - Business & Finance

Think for yourself, anon. Read and understand the white paper and the history of the scaling war (https://hackernoon.com/the-great-bitcoin-scaling-debate-a-timeline-6108081dbada)) and make up your own mind.

>>16698510
No it's a fork of Bitcoin trash

>>16698510
original untampered? what does that even mean. we're talking about software...it's in a constant state of change. BSV changes just make better sense and are truer to the original spirit of bitcoin.

>>16698587
>we're talking about software...it's in a constant state of change.
I thought bitcoin was a protocol as described in the whitepaper? I understand that the code will evolve and bugs fixed, but the bitcoin protocol will stay the same. It is my understanding that btc and bch changed in a way that it does not follow the bitcoin protocol anymore while bsv seeks to restore it back to the protocol describe in the whitepaper. I might be wrong though

>>16698561
Ops BTC broke its chain of digital signatures. Do you know how anon?

>>16698510
no it's impossible for a minority fork of a minority fork to be bitcoin.

>>16698587
To translate no it's not

>>16698791
it did not but it's a misunderstanding from cashies anyhow.

>>16698605
>I thought bitcoin was a protocol as described in the whitepaper?
no if bitcoin was the whitepaper it could have a billion implementations all of which would be bitcoin. anyone on this planet could have their own bitcoin.

what bitcoin is:
- a trustless permissionless publicly auditable ledger that is also secure
- a non-custodial peer-to-peer electronic payment system
- a network of nodes enforcing a common ruleset shaping a common reality in a trustless manner
- the longest blockchain under the consensus ruleset with the largest commulative hash proven by a specific form of proof of work
- a protocol that describes how consensus is reached on ordering transactions and how difficulty and coinbase supply adjusts over time
- a greater consensus on the ruleset that governs the protocol
- a standard reference client implementation created by nakamoto and maintained as an open source project
- an unspent transaction output spendable to a script returning true

what bitcoin is not:
- a whitepaper
- a gargantuan garbage dump of stale data stored immutably forever
- whatever satoshi said in a forum post
- whatever faketoshi dreams up in delirium
- whatever sv jeets shrill and rave about currently

>>16698840
you are literally saying it is a protocol. That protocol is described in the whitepaper. What about the whitepaper do you disagree with?

>>16698824
What makes something a minority fork?

>>16698855
no you don't get it. bitcoin protocol is a billion times stricter and more specific than the whitepaper. any shitcoin can adhere to the whitepaper. but there is only one bitcoin.

>>16698865
minority hash, minority pow chain, minority userbase, minority support, minority valuation, etc take your pick. they all true.

>>16698878
>bitcoin protocol is a billion times stricter and more specific than the whitepaper
hmm, I didn't know there was another bitcoin protocol than the bitcoin whitepaper. Do you have a link?

>>16698824
Segwit was the fork away from the BitCoin protocol. Then bcash forked with ctor and dsv. BitCoin continues

>>16698855
>>16698878
also satoshis released implementation of bitcoin (what everyone actually calls bitcoin) somewhat contradicts his whitepaper at least you have to be real lax and philosophical in the interpretation to match them.

for example satoshi wrote a coin is a chain of signatures but it ain't so it never was.

>>16698909
>somewhat contradicts his whitepaper
how

>>16698909
>for example satoshi wrote a coin is a chain of signatures but it ain't so it never was.
From what I know it actually was before core devs implemented segregate witness

>>16698904
you are a dense motherfucker. the bitcoin protocol is fully described in the bitcoin source code released and maintained by satoshi. just as a whitepaper of ms windows is not something anyone would consider windows the whitepaper is not bitcoin and never was.

>>16698905
that's a cashie fallacy and it's objectively not true.

>>16698921
not segwit. satoshis first (and subsequent) implementation did not define bitcoin as a chain of signatures rather it was an utxo.

BSV shills UNIRONICALLY believe that their chain will
>make governments more honest
>become the global institutional ledger
>be adopted by institutions despite being led by a criminally charged forger

What a bunch of delusion & deceit. The reality is: it's a dragon memecoin with SHITTY custodial & vaporware apps! Absolutely cannot compete.

also here is a multi choice question:

what can you spend as per the bitcoin protocol?
a) signatures, bitcoin is a chain of signatures so i can spend signatures with signatures
b) an unspent transaction output provided you add a valid unlock script that executes to true
c) i'm a cashie retard so the whitepaper!

one more thing to consider:
litecoin adhered to the bitcoin whitepaper 100% in fact most of the source code was the same. but nobody ever considered it bitcoin. if you accept the cashie definition of bitcoin then litecoin is bitcoin (or was before segwit because of cashie retardation and not understanding bitcoin and or segwit)

>>16699088
litecoin is dead
hashrate is plummeting with no survivors since the halving
the same will happen to btc

GREGGLES ON SUICIDE WATCH KEK

>>16699999
>>16699999
>>16699999
>>16699999