/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>17419656
BASED

>centralised shitcoin

>>17419785
Cope. Lightning is the future and you're going to miss the boat.

>>17419785
you mean "centralized" PAJEET. BSV is the most centralized of all the chains as no one can process your stupidly large blocks. Go peddle your shitcoins somewhere else.

So why doesnt anyone use it?

>>17419656
>literally unstoppable

>>17419825
>he doesn't know gigabyte blocks have already been mined on the testnet and will be mined on the mainnet in a year or two, and that IPv6 can handle 4 GB packets
>An optional feature of IPv6, the jumbo payload option in a Hop-By-Hop Options extension header, allows the exchange of packets with payloads of up to one octet less than 4 GB (232 − 1 = 4294967295 octets), by making use of a 32-bit length field. Packets with such payloads are called jumbograms.

>>17419862
A better question is who doesn't use it?

>>17419892
Uhh, nobody can run a node with a billion gigamegs of data. Your scam coin will never take off, retard.

>>17419922
>he has zero clue about what Satoshi actually envisioned for Bitcoin
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=532#msg6306
>The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale. That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server. The design supports letting users just be users. The more burden it is to run a node, the fewer nodes there will be. Those few nodes will be big server farms. The rest will be client nodes that only do transactions and don't generate.
>—Satoshi

>>17419930
u just described centralization fuckface

>>17419950
that's a direct quote by Satoshi, you moron
and no, every major economy will be running one or more such gigantic data centers; that's still highly decentralized, since there will be hundreds of them
in fact, data centers back in 2015 already had hundreds of petabytes of data storage available, and one full year of terabyte blocks is still just 50 petabytes of data, and storage is still getting cheaper and more available

>>17420008
The world didn't stop in 2010 when Satoshi left us.

>>17419930
Satoshi was based. But not a "know it all". Systems should be allowed to evolve, not "protocol set in stone memes". And he is not around anymore so who gives a fuck what he said 10 years ago

>>17419930
>>17420008

Lets be honest here, Satoshi was kinda dumb. He didn't put enough emphasis on decentralization. Luckily the devs that have taken over since then know whats up and will keep things at a correct size so that everyone is capable of running a node. Besides, Satoshi isn't really relevant. He gave us the tech and we made it better with things like Lightning or with malleability fixes like Segwit. BTC is leaps and bounds better than it was 10 years ago.

>>17420032
totally irrelevant, he described the way Bitcoin works and scales, and that hasn't changed at all
also, he never left

>>17419893
People who need to transfer more than pennies worth of BTC. The Lightning Network is exclusively for micropayments because it's insecure.

>>17419656
I heard that before

>>17420041
>imagine thinking the exact opposite of the truth on literally every point

saved this for future reference, can't imagine how anyone can be this stupid

>>17419656
Jew shit right here. BSV is the true coin

>>17420041
https://craigwright.net/blog/law-regulation/on-decentralisation/

>>17420050
If you refrain to believing satosh CSW, even he left for years until he came again with ridiculous claims and forgeries

>>17420101
stop trying to make sense, don't you know "Satoshi was kinda dumb"?

>>17420041
Lightning is handling less than 0.1% worth of Bitcoin's volume.

>>17420112
and who is smart in crypto world??
Roger, CZ or McAfee??

>>17420096
Enjoy never posting that in the future. It's plainly clear that the Bitcoin devs know what they're doing. Price and hash all belongs to BTC and is showing no signs of stopping, especially with institutional interest rising. All at a time when recession is looming. People are going to want a way to get their capital out of the market besides metals so they can continue to trade globally unhindered.

>>17420143
Maybe for now. More will come. Besides Lightning is totally finished yet. Once that happens the chart will break your neck from how fast you look up at the price climb.

>>17420008
bro, your whole argument rests on being able to scale transactions on technology that doesn't exist yet.

have you pajeets ever heard of the strike app technology?
UNFUCKINGSTOPPABLE

>>17420158
I was referencing what that other moron said, read back

>>17420050
yeah yeah, no one with an IQ above room temperature believes that

>>17420041
You are one dumb motherfucker

>>17419892
>non sense techbabble
above 1500 byte you are stressing the network
the average is way way less than that
>muh 4gb
just die

>>17419892
Packet size is irrelevant
Sure GB blocks can be mined though

lightning network is a MEME

>>17420496
it's not irrelevant; it's not strictly necessary, but it will be incredibly useful for a lot of use cases, so not irrelevant at all

>>17420489
there will be terabyte blocks within 3-5 years, gigabyte blocks are just around the corner

>>17420778
I'm not paying the upkeep to manage such a demanding node and nobody else will either. The only ones who possibly could would be mining companies. That's not decentralized and I can't do an audit of the ledger this way.

>>17419656
>boomercoin

>>17420822
I don't know how many times this must be repeated, but
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=532#msg6306
>The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale. That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server. The design supports letting users just be users. The more burden it is to run a node, the fewer nodes there will be. Those few nodes will be big server farms. The rest will be client nodes that only do transactions and don't generate.
>—Satoshi
there will be hundreds of such centers, every major economy will run one or more, so yes, that's still decentralized
stop being such a moron

>>17419656
OK Boomer.

>>17419893
>A better question is who doesn't use it?

literally the entire world. in fact the number of businesses that transact with bitcoin have actually decreased since 2015.

>>17420177

the truth is normies dont actually care about breaking the banks or 'decentralization' they only want a way of buying shit when they go to the store by tapping their paywave card and then going to pick up the kids from school. Normies just want something that is convenient and easy and something that they trust. The use case of bitcoin is basically the same as using their mastercard or visa except with more responsibility on the individual. the only other benefits like transfering money internationally actually are a negative impact on bitcoin since people can dispute a transaction during the lag time it takes to wire money to somebody, so the slightly slower technology is actually more beneficial in this case.

bitcoin just wont ever be a thing, when i got into crypto i thought it was the coolest thing ever and the power to break up big banking but now i realize the only people who cared about that were libertarians and neets. I think everyone universally hates banks and know they fuck us over but still realize we need them. nobody gives a fuck about buying 'coffee' on bitcoin LN, this is a example of reddit tier mentality in solving a problem by introducing technology while failing to take into everyday humans thinking. LN will fail and as a result bitcoin will fail

BSV claims: We scaled, we won
Average block size: 1.9 MB
Average block fees: $2.33 --> Lol

>>17419656
Ahhh yes, very good.

>>17421431
BSVjeets btfo

Muh halvening
Muh mining fees

>>17420008
This is a fake quote fyi

>>17421509
>that satoshi quote isn't a Satoshi quote
>O1G

Checks out.

>that ID

>>17421509
he literally linked the post where Satoshi said it

>>17419656
why would it be stopped

>>17419930
nice distortion of szabo's post
why don't you just ask craig to log in to the forum you linked so he can emphasize the need for big blocks lmao

>>17422400
It wouldn't be, that's the point. That said people like Craig Wright are trying to destroy Bitcoin.

>>17422455
Where are you retards coming from?

>Lets be honest here, Satoshi was kinda dumb. He didn't put enough emphasis on decentralization. Luckily the devs that have taken over since then know whats up and will keep things at a correct size so that everyone is capable of running a node. Besides, Satoshi isn't really relevant. He gave us the tech and we made it better with things like Lightning or with malleability fixes like Segwit. BTC is leaps and bounds better than it was 10 years ago.

>>17422455

The account has been locked for a long time. This is a retarded argument

Also Szabo is by far the least likely Satoshi candidate, and much more of a scammer than CSW.

>>17421509
right above it was a link directly to the post where Satoshi wrote those exact words
please go check yourself for brain damage

You guys really think Satoshi is god huh
Lmfao
He built his network on the shoulders of giants like Ari Juels and Szabo. He was brilliant. But he did not create the panacea.

>>17423125

Craig didnt even know who Szabo was until Wei Dei told him about the Bitgold paper in an email.

>Ari Juels

Lel