/biz/ - Business & Finance

No, you are meant to hold. Buy games with your fiat.

>>28756712
Invest in Cardano.

Lightning is cool, but Cardano is the future.

>>28756712
>install phoenix wallet
>go to: https://joltfun.com/
>buy game for 1c fee
>instant transaction
>realize you've been lied to

>>28756846
Does Steam accept Lightning Bitcoin?
Or are you a lying faggot as well?

>>28756764
thisthisthisthisthis

>>28756915
Does your mum's pussy accept LN?
Shut the fuck up you little whining bitch faggot.

>>28757026
Start developing. Quit scamming people on forums!

>>28756764
>Lightning is cool
you have to go back

>>28756761
>Buy games with your fiat.
Nah, just use Litecoin bro

>>28756761
>No, you are meant to hold
Lol, this guy gets it.

BTC is the magical currency you cant spend, hahahahhaha

Bitcoin devs, seriously wtf is their problem?

>>28756712

>>28759181
>tfw the transaction fee is more expensive than amazon postage costs

>>28756764
I've been hearing about lightning network since 2017, where the fuck is it

>>28759433
>$0.0026 for privacy so good the glowies will pay anyone who can break it
uhhh ok anon keep comparing cutting edge tech to amazon postage(?)

>>28759512
Maxis keep telling that Lightning is here and it works. Altcoiners keep telling Lightning has problems that aren't solved and there is little LN usage happening.
If anyone is thinking who is right, go look at your exchanges and see if they are accepting Lightning Bitcoins.

>>28760387
Obviously Steam doesn't accept crypto anymore but you can easily buy Steam gift cards on Bitrefill with Lightning.

>>28760567
Binance or Coinbase should start using Lightning already. Why aren't they?

mempool is empty today, you can send a bitcoin tx for less than $2. weird that it's so popular yet no one seems to use it

>>28756712
It’s already scaling on layer 2/3
Scaling in layer 1 it’s impossible without bloating archive nodes with petabytes of spam

>>28760865
Nope.
Mempool gets a bit of a relief during the weekend. But it is still completely full with almost $10 tx fees currently.
https://privacypros.io/tools/bitcoin-fee-estimator/

>>28759512
Lots of wallet apps out there using lightning

>>28756712

>>28756915
they should lightning was made for retail purchase and micropayments.

>>28756712
ETH

>>28762292
that's actuality bullshit.
routing doesn't have to solve any byzantine general problem. it's just difficult on a large free forming graph.
layer 1 does all that for lightning. lightning only has to solve the routing of payments. and that's extremely difficult on a large mesh network it also requires too much liquidity to be locked up in channels.

now on a more centralized layout where exchanges are the central hubs and you can get from anyone to anyone in 2 hops average lightning has no issues with routing whatsoever.

>>28756712
Just forget about this proof of concept that is the "digital gold", retard.

Buy your fucking games with ADA, ALGO, NANO...

>>28757392
based digital silver boomerbro

Btw, there is no scaling coming. Bitcoin is literally "as is" and will always be. The digital gold MUST NOT CHANGE. If you haven't figured that out, you must be even more retarded than the average pajeet here. Soon BTC transactions cost will be >= to the price of your steam games anon.

>>28762707
there have been tremendous development on bitcoin the past decade tho. it flies under most peoples radar because they don't have a marketing department making up memes about their roadmap and progress every day.

taproot for example allows for (among other things like privacy and quantum resistance) non-custodial shared liquidity pools which would especially be useful for lightning hubs and also probably multipath channels which would be just as useful.

people that say bitcoin doesn't intend to scale have no clue what is going on on github.

>>28757421
>it's decentralized!
>only large organizations run the bloated shitshow, mostly chinks
We did it goys!

>>28760387
Kraken uses LN for all its transactions

>>28762915
technically decentralized only means there is no single point of failure or there is no single actor being able to unilaterally taking control of the network or shitting it down.
but most importantly it means the actors in the space don't have to trust each other.
go be stupid somewhere else!

>>28762923
sauce?
AFAIK they had plans to integrate optional LN in the first half of this year, but havent mentioned it again since the first announcement

>>28762819
Yet, if a major hardfork/upgrade for Bitcoin was to happen, the "gold 2.0 offered by a mysterious Satoshi individual" narrative would be hurt significantly.
People are buying an idea. People are buying stability, they think Bitcoin is "as is". I am not even speculating here, I am 100% sure of that fact.

If you want scalability for bitcoin, stop it and go buy fucking Digibyte or Nano. Bitcoin is not there for that. 7 tx/s is more than enough for the unchanging digital gold

>>28762975
Have fun with your doomed shitshow. It's a speculation game and you know it. The whole lie was that tons of people would run full nodes. Anyone with a brain looked at the system and knew what was going to happen instead.

>>28763216
bitcoin doesn't really need hardforks. even segwit which was the second greatest improvement on the protocol was done as a soft fork.
p2sh was the single most important development spearheded by gavin. it was the most profound change i the bitcoin protocol even tho it seems small and meaningless.
taproot also will be a soft fork.

>>28763217
>The whole lie was that tons of people would run full nodes.
a lot of people business and institutions run full nodes.
the only lie is you fags pretending you have been somehow duped by bitcoin.

>>28763217
>It's a speculation game and you know it.
what i know is that it's an asymmetric bet.
only fools don't take it.

>>28763420
Bitcoin will need hardforks if/when society forces it to transition to some proof of stake kind of system because ecolo-commies in power in the west want BTC dead.

In any case, it can't happen. BTC will never change. All the softfork are minor upgrades desu. Never felt like the dev around BTC was "tremendous" at all. BTC itself, as it was since 2012-2013 is great.

>>28756712
NO! It shouldn't used to buy shit with, that just clogs up the fucking network.

>>28763678
pos not gonna happen. not even bch wants to go full pos. but they need to do something with their mining shitshow.

>>28763678
>Never felt like the dev around BTC was "tremendous" at all.
because you never looked at github change history. lemme guess you are a rando nobody who can't read code...

i mean it's true bitcoin never gonna chage as a protocol it was set in stone by satoshi. if it changes it stops being bitcoin.

but development was still insane over the years. people are blind to this, but it makes me extremely bullish and i would be pretty damn bullish just based on the fundamentals.

bitcoin choose the path of exponential scaling and not making a sacred cow out of the blockchain. for core the blockchain is a burden and not some miracle feature.

Bitcoin is gold; something else will have to be paper money.

>>28756712
BTC is not Bitcoin

It already did

>>28764022
I've been following the space since 2015..., I am a software eng, that's why I went into BTC but more especially ETH, which initially I found to be a much more interesting design. Don't know why you felt the need to say that kek.
>i mean it's true bitcoin never gonna chage as a protocol it was set in stone by satoshi. if it changes it stops being bitcoin.
that's literally what I'm saying from the start...
>bitcoin choose the path of exponential scaling
Exponential scaling? exponential growth, yes, for sure. but scaling no. Forget scaling. It's not benefiting anyone in the space except users, will never happen.

So we agree, BTC will stay BTC ad vitam eternam. Altcoins are for the (other) usercases

>>28764243
>>28764254
sorry schizos nobody is buying your bullshit
you had your window of opportunity in 2018 to at least take over bcash. you failed miserably.

>>28764243
>>28764254
>Dragon logo
>Satoshi's Vision™

>>28764339
>Exponential scaling?
yes exponential scaling. lemme show you something a small thought experiment is all that should shed some light into the potential bitcoin core is building up to.
>a single lightning payment channel can do 25k tx/sec and you can make almost 150k of them per day which puts bitcoins testbench throughput to around 3.75 billion tx/sec after first day of doing so.
billions of tx/sec with near instant finality with 1mb blocks.
that is what i call exponential scaling.

>>28756712
Have a few steam cards, will trade for crypto like XRP or other low fee. Have no use for them.

>>28764339
>BTC will stay BTC ad vitam eternam
i hope so. but i also believe it will scale massively by various techniques to decrease the shared global burden.
we have payment aggregation on-chain, we have lightning for off chain we have auditable sidechain smart contract templates with taproot we have coinprune and assume-utxo to ditch 99% of the blockchain for full nodes and still be able to trustlessly sync up with each other...

you see in the end old transactions are garbage. they don't contribute to consensus and we don't have to keep them. bitcoin will reach 1.0 when it can finally ditch the burden of blockchain.

>>28764357
>>28764368
World Record 16.4 Million transaction block on Bitcoin SV STN!
https://twitter.com/SaturnJS/status/1356912365229473794
----------------------------
309MB block on BSV Main Net. Thats a new world record. Containing 1,178,322 transactions. Thats 1,17 MILLION.
BTC has a 1mb Block size with a max cap of 7 transactions per second.
https://twitter.com/vires_numeris/status/1260319123583664128
-----------------------------
A Brokerless ON-CHAIN Exchange - Where you can buy Stocks, Commodities and Crypto
https://tdxp.app/
750,000 Profits in first 3 months

People have NO idea what's coming

>>28764243
>>28764254
This. We already scaled Bitcoin but people are still sleeping on that fact due to aussie man bad. There will be a rude awakening.

>>28764616
what's coming is sv falls out of top 20

>>28764433
yeah but lightning network is absolutely not impressive at all. Payment channels are ... not decentralized tech.
Even 1m tx/s, yeah okay. I prefer to use my mastercard instead. Playing a bit the idiot here but it's the idea. L2 are irrelevant, both for BTC and ETH.

>>28756712
bitrefill->buy steam cards with btc/eth

I've been doing that for ages.

>>28764735
it's very impressive and payment channels are as decentralized as layer 1.

you see the blockchain deals with the double spend problem. only by locking coins in to escrow you can ditch the double spend problem off-chain.
>L2 are irrelevant
not if you want to do exponential scaling. and also i don't see why you paying for your coffee should constitute to a shared global burden for mankind.

>>28760759
> why doesn’t coinbase and binance use lightning

Because they are slow and gay. Binance only got Segwit addresses to work last month for hecks sake. They spend all their time on adding alts to separate /biz/ from their shekles. No time for anything actually useful.

>>28764433
>lmao dude weed

You must have lost too many braincells already if you were not born this dumb. Finality is only reached if the tx is settled on chain but you can't settle them after each transaction because the btc chain cant scale. LN is a rube goldberg machine. Also muh decentralization but you can only connect to other participants through central hubs. Retard alert

>>28764584
dude your thought process will literally lead you to NANO. Coin is hated here but does that pure payment scaling best in the space, and arguably can't be topped technologically/fundamentally.

No, BTC will stay a good old slow digital gold. Miners will mine it forever, or until economies/society kicks mining infrastructure because of energy waste, destabilizing miners around the world, and breaking the confidence in the BTC security and longevity.

Last scenario sounds not impossible, but not likely for the next 10 years. But if it happen, don't hope for scaling BTC. Buy altcoins.

>>28764679
It could goto #100 and time and transactions will bring it to #1.
Use wins in the end. BTC is unusable as currency. Eth is unusable.

1 sat trades
Everything on chain
Trust-less
No third parties
No 2nd and 3rd layers
No Pre-mine
Proof of Work
HUGE blocks size
Zero confirmations
Turing Complete
The largest number of blockchain patents in the world
Apps coming left and right

We ain't worried...

>>28763473
Satoshi's second mail that he ever wrote literally tells you that at scale, there is no room for hobby nodes. Its only datacenters running full nodes mining Bitcoin. All other users are running SPV nodes to read and store block headers. Stop making yourself look like an idiot.

>>28764898
>Finality is only reached if the tx is settled on chain
first of all even being included in a block means only probabilistic finality.
second the game theory of lightning and the layer-1 smart contracts it uses make for very good instant probabilistic finality because the punishment for desertion is pretty severe.

so it's all good.

>but you can only connect to other participants through central hubs.
which you can freely pick or form with your fellow minded friends. remember shared liquidity pools?

its good the network can be both decentralized but centralized enough for efficiency.

>>28756712
just wait for atomic swaps. its going to be tits.

>>28764735
> I prefer to use MasterCard
So you prefer to keep your funds with a KYC money transmitter that can freeze them if ordered to. NGMI.

>>28764910
>dude your thought process will literally lead you to NANO
no it won't. i don't care about shitcoins. they are drops in a sea of shitcoins. they compete with each other while bitcoin competes with gold and the central banks.

that's how i see it at least.

>>28764942
>Use wins in the end.
if that was the case we would live in a very different world. but i also don't see the use in bcash or sv. they are both horrible.

>>28765098
spv is overblown in importance.
it's a neat trick, but it only works if the nakamoto consensus is intact which means it only works on btc and it's pretty limited of use in itself. it only really gives you trustless verification of a particular tx being included in a particular block that's all. doesn't let you build an utxo can't check the validity of that chain at all.

so yeah spv is pretty meh. great for lightweight phone wallet's tho.

>>28765338
>only works if the nakamoto consensus is intact
All you need to understand if you have a higher than room temperature IQ is that any attempt to scale Bitcoin on L2 in a decentralised way inevitably ends up requiring routing, a means of solving the Byzantine General's problem and tamper-proof records, which is exactly why you have a fucking blockchain in the first place. If you cannot understand this, you belong on reddit, not biz. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGrUOLsC9cw

>>28765475
I view coinbase cashapp and paypal as perfectly fine L2 solutions. I really dont see why I need to record a tx on the chain other than saying "Its my coin. I have a cold wallet." If I'm being honest with myself, being able to say that is the only reason I have any coins off-exchange. I haven't paid for shit with bitcoin since silk road. I dont think it matters. number goes up, thats all that will matter.

>>28765475
but that's bullshit. lightning doesn't have to solve double spending the smart contract on layer-1 does.

how can you be so retarded and be so full of your supposed intelligence at the same time?

crypto is basically never going to be taken seriously as long as bitcoin is #1

like I get it, it deserves a seat at the table for being first. but it should not move the whole market when it cannot actually function as a currency anymore. it defeats the whole purpose.

it's pretty obvious for anyone with "above room temperature iq" that "solving the Byzantine General's problem and tamper-proof records" is done on layer-1...

i wish we could send cashies to re-indoctrination camps where they are raped until they stop spouting retarded shit.

>>28756915
you can buy a steam key anywhere

>>28765677
>doesn't have to solve double spending
no asset needs to solve this. Look at gold, silver, gamestop. All stocks are double spent and no one cares.

>>28765677
>but that's bullshit. lightning doesn't have to solve double spending
Are you on drugs ? Hope you are not a business that doesn't get a double spend on lightning.
A Double second on lightning breaks it all. NOT relying on a third party to mediate a Double spend is the entire reason Bitcoin was created. It's right in the intro to the Whitepaper

>>28756764
fuck off shill, cardano is a scam and a dead project

>>28765829
it's not possible like i explained double spending is dealt with on layer-1.
also you as a payee has no such risk and no downtime risk at all.
business will be able to afford the infrastructure or watchtower service required to be 100% sure thy have no downtime risk.

>>28765829
>breaks it all
not really so long as its rolled back. much like short sells are
>whitepaper
who cares whats in the whitepaper. We are a store of value now, not a medium of exchange. Thats a good thing.

>>28765829
i wish you absolute cucked retards could read the fucking whitepaper till the end and not stuck on the first paragraph of the intro.

>>28765829
lmao you have no idea how lightning works
I bet you think "layer2" means somebody gets all the bitcoin and does the transactions off chain lmaoooo

>>28765994
>who cares whats in the whitepaper
that's a good point. the whitepaper is meaningless but i'm still pretty bummed that everything that would make you run away screaming from the cash forks is right in the whitepaper and no cahsie reads it. and then they flaunt it in your face. and this has been going on for 3 years now.

>>28756846
BASED. Nigger OP wanted to FUD, not learn.
/thread

>>28763217
no coiner cope is so entertaining, you've had 10 years to make millions and you just failed at every opportunity, only excuse is if you were born yesterday

>>28756712
Why the fuck would you want to spend the scarcest currency ever invented by mankind on a shitty fucking videogame, and then have to log capital gains tax on it?

The only reason to ever buy anything with bitcoin is because it is for a lifelong passion. Buying the perfect plot of land to start a family for example, or something that is incredibly valuable and personal to you.

>>28765156
> just wait for atomic swaps. its going to be tits.
are you a fucking joke? is this 2016 again?
>>28765165
I prefer the >200m merchants network effect you absolute disgrace
> they compete with each other while bitcoin competes with gold and the central banks.
>BTC is the digital gold and is fucking perfect as is
>wait for this X improvement
>wait for payment channels
> Bitcoin compete with gold and central banks but Bitcoin needs scalability
The absolute state of BTC holders... top fucking kek

>>28766065
oh I love that man. was able to sell BitcoinCash and get more Bitcoin. This is like the railroad stocks in UK in 1800s, exciting tech, there will be lots of shit thrown at wall, most people will lose everything, and some of us will walk away in victory. This is shaping up to be a really fun decade.

>>28765952
>it's not possible like i explained double spending is dealt with on layer-1.
Technically correct. But that does not mean the person that did a transaction on lightning is not the victim of a double spend.
I buy a lightning coffee and send the same BTC to two friends. I walk out with my lightning coffee and drink it.
The vendor never gets paid and my friend gets the BTC.
Now that double spend never makes it to the layer 1 chain because all lighting transactions are settles on the BTC blockchain after the fact.
A Double spend still occurs .Lightning Network is a “payment layer” that records BTC transactions off-chain, then settles them in bulk on the BTC blockchain at a later time.

>>28766065
Didnt satoshi talk about btc banks as he predicted not all transactions could go on mainchain?

>>28766003
Not an argument. Make one

>>28766173
bitcoin doesn't need scalability we just want it to have it all if possible. if not then store of value is still a bang up use-case.

>>28764022
Based github lurker.
Bitcoin has the most technically proficient and competent dev team of any coin and it's not even close.

>>28765994
>not really so long as its rolled back. much like short sells are
How you gonna role back the BTC blockchain ?

>who cares whats in the whitepaper. We are a store of value now, not a medium of exchange. Thats a good thing.
Coo, but that's not Bitcoin. That's Store of Value coin.
Bitcoin is Trustless peer-to-peer digital cash.

>>28766201
>Technically correct. But that does not mean the person that did a transaction on lightning is not the victim of a double spend.
the person that did the transaction by definition can't be double spent.
only hubs and business have offline risk.

>>28764735
Huge fucking blocks are not decentralized, and they also aren't "tech". Imagine thinking that just shoving more data on chain is a form of tech and scaling.

Scaling is when you get more for less, not when you get more for more. Any idiot can do that

>>28756712
>He thinks BTC can scale

>>28766231
no it's a wish. my arguments are there in this thread tho. if only you assholes read anything you did not made up.
>>28766259
indeed. the first priority of the btc dev swarm (it's a bit bigger than a team) was to make bitcoin diamond hard. fixing errors and potential errors alone have i don't know how many million devhours in them.

>>28764851
based, you are the most intelligent ITT. sad the reatrds won't understand what you try to explain them. It's okay. let them be poor. you sir, are a chad and will make it, or have already, no doubt.

>>28766220
not to my knowledge but hal finney sure did.
satoshi only talked about putting every quorum into a single proof of work system is unscalable.

>>28766299
>only hubs and business have offline risk.
Yeah and they have to rely on a third party. A Lightning Node.
That's not bitcoin. The Lightning Network Additionally removes Bitcoin’s inherent traceability as well.

>>28766465
thx man it's rare to get the slightest shred of appreciation.

>>28766285
>How you gonna role back the BTC blockchain ?
because its not onchain
>bitcoin should
well it isnt bro. its a speculative asset and thats just fine.

>>28766507
it's a choice. small actors may rely on third party for insurance. larger actors can easily deal with the inexpensive infrastructure required to protect themselves.

the truth is you can run your own watchtower in aws for example. so this talk about needing to trust others is bullshit. you can choose if it's worth it for you or simpler for you but you sure don't have to.

>>28766507
>The Lightning Network Additionally removes Bitcoin’s inherent traceability as well.
and you say that as a bad thing... interesting.

>>28766507
>That's not bitcoin
lol. I get the same feeling from your comments as people who buy a game like Cyberpunk based on the hype video and are upset when all the advertised features were left on the cutting room floor. Make your own bitcoin, I'm happy just making money.

>>28766530
>>How you gonna role back the BTC blockchain ?
>because its not onchain
EXACTLY

So there you admit that it is not immutable.
The entire point of Bitcoin is to not rely on any third parties; it is immutable and self-verifiable.

>>28766644
>and you say that as a bad thing... interesting.
Bitcoin was never meant to be anonymous. Private yes but never anonymous.

>>28766650
Bitcoin is the bitcoin protocol. It's not whatever you want it to be.

>>28766679
>Bitcoin should
its very tiring, you are foisting an ought on what is an is. Bitcoin isnt scalable. No one cares. Bitcoin wont be used for buying coffee. No one cares. Lighting network won't be a silver bullet. Was never ment to be. Fact of the matter is its buying me cars and paid off my college loan, thats what it was always ment to do.

>>28756712
They did it's called Ampl

>>28766259
> Bitcoin has the most technically proficient and competent dev team of any coin and it's not even close.
Algorand might want to talk to you.

>>28766679
>So there you admit that it is not immutable.
bcash or sv is not immutable. tehy could be reorged with a small fraction of btc hashpoweer.
there is absolutely no finality on a shitfork with a fractional hash participating.

lightning has decent finality and good incentives but it's still pretty much in beta. but so is bitcoin. bitcoin been in beta test mode for the last decade basically.

>>28766716
it's the opposite actually. bitcoin was always meant to work anonymously but still being publicly auditable.

>>28766865
No you are tiring.
Bitcoin is the protocol. Period end of story.
The licensing of the protocol allows forking of the software and make alternative versions like Litecoin, doge etc. But, they have no rights to change the protocol using the underlying database.
This is what Blockstream did with BTC.

>>28767126
>bcash or sv is not immutable. tehy could be reorged with a small fraction of btc hashpoweer.
Bullshit. Try it. It's immutable even before it hits the mempool.

>>28767279
there is no owner to enforce those rights. therefore there are no rights since there is no injured party. therefore anyone can do whatever the fuck they want. Hash power for security and price action for gains are the only important things now.

>>28765871
Copesaurus Rex

>>28767173
That is incorrect
Instead of anonymity, Bitcoin offers privacy. This means your identity isn’t always revealed, but there’s an audit trail should anyone want (or need) to investigate wrongdoing.

>>28767400
and in 2 days an English court will decide IF there is an owner...
Get your popcorn.

>>28767279

>>28767464
lololol, just like south florida court did? when kleinman's family sued for 1 million coins?

>>28767423
this kind of conversation is so fucking bullish for Monero kek.

The Bitcoin world is a fucking joke lmao. Shit will hit 1 million probably and make me a multi millionaire but still is the biggest joke of my lifetime

>>28767423

what are you on about boomer? Bitcoin isn't anonymous are you retarded?

>>28767569
That case has nothing to do with his identity.
It has to do with the ownership of 1.1 million Bitcoin held in trust.

>>28767573
Different use cases. Business need a trail.
Drug Dealers dont'

>>28767633
Do you have a reading comprehension problem ?
Where did I say Bitcoin is anonymous ?

>Instead of anonymity, Bitcoin offers privacy. This means your identity isn’t always revealed, but there’s an audit trail should anyone want (or need) to investigate wrongdoing.

>>28767645
And he was unable to assert that identity there....but this time is different I'm sure. Sign the block and there will be an end to the horror
>>28767573
If the crack that washing machine....just get ready to move.

>>28767773
>And he was unable to assert that identity there.
He wasn't asked to. The Kleinman case is about whether or not the Estate of Kleinman is owned half of the 1.1 million Bitcoins or if ALL of the Bitcoins are Craig Wrights. Kleinman was the trustee of the trust.

it has Z E R O to do with whether or not Craig Wright is Satoshi.

>>28767879
I had the forum to assert the identity and claim everything. and was unable to do so. Just as he should be able to sign those blocks, and is unable to do so. Regardless of what you want this coin to be, fact of the matter is BTC is more secure from hash power alone, and has name recognition. Both of these factors are attracting big money. Add in the stability of not having a "keyman" like vitalik. Its won the war and thats fucking great for the clear-eyed and hell for the ideologues and idealists.

>>28756712
Just wait for the PayPal and Mastercard side chains

>>28767698

>privacy
>mfw everyone that knows your wallet address can see how much bitcoin you have

nah dude bitcoin is not anonymous and not private. But back then it was both private & anonymous because everyone with a PC can mine BTC and spend it on darkweb. Nowadays most of the bitcoin mined in China with thousands of ASICs in every facility and you can't really buy BTC without KYC because now governments and private corporations can do on-chain analysis and can track you

>>28768153
>Just as he should be able to sign those blocks, and is unable to do so.
The direct successor of Satoshi Nakamoto as lead developer on the Bitcoin project was Gavin Andresen.
Gavin Andersen explicitly said that Craig Wright signed a message using the private key from Block #1 of Bitcoin. Time was spent on a careful cryptographic verification of messages signed with keys that only Satoshi should possess. He did similar signings for Jon Matonis, Ian Grigg, Stefan Matthews and Calvin Ayre - none of which would be easy to fool, and none of which have retracted their claims.
So who do we trust? You or the lead developer of Bitcoin ?
https://youtu.be/gTPcm4zCJIg?t=6

>Regardless of what you want this coin to be, fact of the matter is BTC is more secure from hash power alone
You literally have no idea what you are on about. After a certain number of nodes a network isn't significantly more secure.

You people should actually be studying this whole thing ALOT more..
Craig Wright is the person who has the biggest number of blockchain patents in the world. FACT.
What they don't want you to see about Craig Wright and BitCoin (BSV, Satoshi Vision)
https://youtu.be/hXUOSCGfuJA

>>28767423
no it doesn't offer real privacy. but it works ina completely anonymous fashion as your identity is not connected to transactions in any shape or form. it can be implied but not proven. basically it's inadmissible speculation and becomes exponentially hard with transactions chained.

>>28768321
>nah dude bitcoin is not anonymous and not private.
Dude go back to your bowl. You're fucking high.
Bitcoin is private you asshat
https://explorer.bitcoin.com/btc/tx/c8d9e2936e13e7beb7e225c4ccd519a4ac80ec8ef098afe323f974d713940a2a

Tell me EXACTLY who that person is.
OH! You can't ? That's because Bitcoin is private.

Bitcoin was never anonymous, but, rather, pseudo-anonymous.
Just ask the over 1000 people who thought they were anonymous and are now in jail.

>>28767645
>Bitcoin held in trust
this shit still cracks me up. what level of brain damage you have to have to believe satoshi of all people would fuck around with lawyers and word documents when securing his bitcoins?

>>28768506
>That's because Bitcoin is private.
no it's not. you are completely confusing the two term. either you do it on purpose to troll or you are the stupidest cashie i ever met.

>>28768515
and yet the trust actually exists...
and Dave Klienman the number 2 on the project was the trustee and the keys are right there in the trust.

>>28768366
>none of which would be easy to fool
its easy to fool any single person. much harder to fool everyone. He just needs to tweet (sending 1 coin from block one to Y address) and its over.
>After a certain number of nodes a network isn't significantly more secure.
>significantly more secure
>significantly
more secure is more secure. And we are talking orders of magnitude.

>>28768506
most killers are anonymous as they don't leave their name at the crime scene. killing doesn't require to reveal your identity. yet killers are still caught. go figure.

same goes for bitcoin it's an anonymous system your identity is not tied to your activities in the system. it can be tied off-chain but that's no concern of bitcoins.

yet every transaction you do on-chain is traceable and auditable so it's definitely not private. it's a global distributed ledger. how could it be private?

>>28768552
No YOU do not understand 3 terms

Private
Anonymous and
pseudo-anonymous

A Check is not anonymous because you name is on it.
A Credit card purchase is not anonymous if your name is on the card.
A trust is PRIVATE because your name isn't readily available
Bitcoin is Private because your name isn't on the transaction.
Neither Bitcoin or a trust are anonymous because they can be linked back to the owner.

>>28768740
no bitcoin transaction has your name on it. unless you include it in the output script but then you could be lying of course so it's just graffiti.

>>28768740
>because your name isn't on the transaction.
that literally only means it's anonymous

anonymous means no name given

>>28768607
>its easy to fool any single person. much harder to fool everyone. He just needs to tweet (sending 1 coin from block one to Y address) and its over.
There are a few reasons why he can't do that.
The Kleinmans have said UNDER OATH, that Craig Wright HAS the key's to the 1.1 million bitcoin.
He cannot take the Bitcoin because that would be illegal. Ownership has not been determined. That is why they are in court.

Now imagine this scenerio. Craig Wright loses the court case with the Klienman's and he has to give half of the 1.1 million Bitcoin to the Klienmans.
The day before he signs with the keys publically and the price of Bitcoin drops 80%
Now he is civilly liable to the Kleinman for that money because he caused the drop in price.

That is only ONE reason why he cannot sign publically. There are many.

>>28768937
>He cannot take the Bitcoin because that would be illegal.
bitcoins alleged by craig wright to be in the trust already moved. by your logic he is beyond fucked.

>>28768857
>no bitcoin transaction has your name on it
That's what I said tard. Put down the bowl.

>>because your name isn't on the transaction.
>that literally only means it's anonymous

Is Bitcoin anonymous?

Bitcoin is designed to allow its users to send and receive payments with an acceptable level of privacy as well as any other form of money. However, Bitcoin is not anonymous and cannot offer the same level of privacy as cash. The use of Bitcoin leaves extensive public records. Various mechanisms exist to protect users' privacy, and more are in development. However, there is still work to be done before these features are used correctly by most Bitcoin users.
https://bitcoin.org/en/faq#is-bitcoin-fully-virtual-and-immaterial

>>28769046
https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1DGWivpu9x1ZFkYJvhS91o1zp851CguPXB
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536.512.7.pdf

>>28769104
>That's what I said tard.
that's not where our argument lies. i told you that means literally it's anonymous. as a system bitcoin is completely anonymous.
>Is Bitcoin anonymous?
yes brainlet

>>28769046
>bitcoins alleged by craig wright to be in the trust already moved. by your logic he is beyond fucked.
ALL and some are two different things. His liability is up to the courts to decide. Not the public square.

>try to short sell it
>it rises
>"okay, fuck it, let's just buy and stake"
>it dumps
Schizo crypto, I swear to God.

I got only one lesson, wanna trade with profit - try bots. Waiting for Bot Ocean release to use best instruments

>>28768506
>OH! You can't ? That's because Bitcoin is private.

Bitcoin can't make a transaction without logging it to a public database, it's not private

>>28769154
He didn't claim that address. Shadders made the list with an algorithm to simplify things for the court.
A mistake was made. These things happen.

>>28769203
moving the gaolpost? the amount of copium you snort will have serious mental health effects.

>>28769199
>>Is Bitcoin anonymous?
>yes brainlet
>>28769255
>Bitcoin can't make a transaction without logging it to a public database, it's not private
Is Bitcoin anonymous?

Bitcoin is designed to allow its users to send and receive payments with an acceptable level of privacy as well as any other form of money. However, Bitcoin is not anonymous and cannot offer the same level of privacy as cash. The use of Bitcoin leaves extensive public records. Various mechanisms exist to protect users' privacy, and more are in development. However, there is still work to be done before these features are used correctly by most Bitcoin users.
https://bitcoin.org/en/faq#is-bitcoin-fully-virtual-and-immaterial

Read what bitcoin.org says. Then go argue with them over semantics.

>>28769260
craigs list he submitted when the judge forced him was based on the shadders list. which is a complete fabrication of course. just like everything else submitted by craig.

>>28769334
>Is Bitcoin anonymous?
yes brainlet it's anonymous. i don't really give a fuck who wrote what. it's more anonymous than 4chan.

>>28769287
>moving the gaolpost? the amount of copium you snort will have serious mental health effects.
Last time I looked I am not the judge and neither are you.
Do you know 100% for sure that the coins that moved are the coins in question ?
You do understand that he owns ALOT more coins than are in the trust right ?

.. but for arguments sake let's say 50 of the coins out of 1.1. million moved. What's your point ?
If he did it, then the courts can decide damages IF it is determined those are not his coins.

>>28769392
>>Is Bitcoin anonymous?
>yes brainlet it's anonymous. i don't really give a fuck who wrote what. it's more anonymous than 4chan.
"Bitcoin is not anonymous and cannot offer the same level of privacy as cash"
bitcoin.org

Go argue with them

>>28769429
i was referring to this post of yours >>28768937
from this you moved the goalpost. and we can all see it even tho 4chan is not an immutable ledger. it's good enough especially with warosu as backup.

>>28769464
and? who cares about other people being wrong? it's an anonymous system. and most importantly your guesses about who own what are inadmissable as evidence in court.

>>28756712
One day you will be able to buy the company Steam with a few BTC.

>>28769504
are you dumb ?
I said that COULD be the repercussions of moving the coins

IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF

A Judge decides it is....
MAYBE a judge decides it's no big deal because there is no proof of ownership yet for either party
MAYBE a Judge decides that there is no material loss
MAYBE a Judge immediately puts Craig Wright in jail

a Scenerio I lay out is ONE scenerio with many multiple outcomes
On top of that the scenerio may never play out or play out differently.
You make No point at all..

>>28769757
lol you are mad and start sperging when you are caught lying. just like your idol.

>>28769867
wtf the fuck are you on about ? LAy it out.Show the lies. Quote it, don't link it.

>>28769757
>He cannot take the Bitcoin because that would be illegal.
>That is only ONE reason why he cannot sign publically.

well first of all you have been proven wrong. and also you can sign with a bitcoin address WITHOUT moving anything so you are also bullshitting.

>>28769891
you have been so thoroughly btfo in this thread about everything you said so far it's probably time to just walk away in shame and let me get back to my work.

>>28769976
>well first of all you have been proven wrong.
about what ? Something rattling around in your head that you can't seem to enunciate ?

> and also you can sign with a bitcoin address WITHOUT moving anything so you are also bullshitting.
Where did I say you couldn't ? please link me to where I said that, because I didn't.

If he signed for the public it would mean that he IS Satoshi. It would affect the value of BTC.
If the Klienmans end up being the owners of X amount Bitcoin from the trust and the price dropped X% because Craig Wright signed a bitcoin address then he "COULD POSSIBLY" be liable for their loss.

So he want's a court to say that he is legally Satoshi then he want's to have a court decide who the 1.1 million bitcoin belong to. 100% to him or 50/50 with the Klienman estate or 10/90 or whatever the judge decides.

>>28770052
you can't convince someone of something they dont want to believe. Some people are very distressed when things are "out of control" this is why they were searching for satoshi to begin with, and have held up wright as their pope. Someone is in charge, someone is in control, everything will be fine. Thats what they want. Same reason illumatti, masons, deep state, etc have such appeal. The truth that no one is in control really fucking scares some people. You aren't going to argue them out a position they weren't argued into.

Cardano is for Biz what Q was to Pol.
>just ten more years guys then goguen is out
>muh smartcontracts are coming soon
>shelley is so lit though
Nothing happens on it. Its vaporware. A dead ghostchain. Youre buying tokens for nothing

>>28770529
i literally quoted you and you can't even read your own posts amazing.

>>28770678
he isn't thinking, just reacting. like a scared animal. just put yourself in his shoes. You have watched btc go from $3k to $50k and the entire time you "know" its "fake", it isnt what it *should* be, its "wrong", the "good man" wright is smeared unjustly for years for being the "good man". Must be absolutely terrifying to view reality like that. Add to that everyone you argue against is making way more money than you. Its classic death cult shit going on here.

>>28756712
SCALING SOLVED DAY1

>>28770529
also rofl about the price argument. that's just plain retarded. also craig only has like 14 btc to his name. so like whatever. we are arguing about coins that never were. especially since the court case is not about the satoshi trove but coins mined between 2011 and 2013. where satoshi probably didn't even mined at all and craig definitely didn't mined and the satoshi trove is from before.

>>28770536
So go on oh wise one. Who is Satoshi ?

>>28770678
>i literally quoted you
No you didn't. Now you are lying

>>28770838
yeah.

>>28770918
>craig only has like 14 btc to his name.
KEK ok man..

>>28770923
and you don't see the irony dripping from that post? you took it out of context no wonder your little brain is confused. look it up on twitter...

>>28771007
L M F A O

sure thing man

>>28756712
it crashes now

>>28770951
ahahahaha oh boy.
>>28770536
man i'm done... this just got weird.

>>28771046
You lose.. Can't quote.. Can just talk shit with your buddy

>>28770923
I dont care who he/they are at all. I do not require a master to be in control my universe.
You aren't actually reading these posts, you are only reacting with your scripture. Read about death cults and break out of that paradigm man. Reality is pretty fucking dope once you accept it.

Craig Wright is the person who has the biggest number of blockchain patents in the world. FACT.
What they don't want you to see about Craig Wright and BitCoin (BSV, Satoshi Vision)
https://youtu.be/hXUOSCGfuJA

>>28771022

>>28756764
>Lighting is cool
What a faggot you are, same as my friend who doesn't understand a thing

>>28771078
you are an actual mental midget. i'm sorry for abusing you. i feel real bad now.

>>28771113
Then tell me why Tether is no longer paying for McCormick ? LOL
too funny.. the butthurt is gonna be beautiful

>>28771151
Yawn
meanwhile

>>28771157
just take a deep breath and calm down. this is not funny anymore. you should seek help it's not too late maybe you can salvage your portfolio too.

>>28756712
It will never scale, anon. It will never be used as currency like 2013~2015

>>28771239
sure thing Sigmund

>>28756761
Soonish the Coinbase Card will give you the ability to use it, and it’s like 1% Cashback in bitcoin or 4% I’m other crypto’s. Pretty cool imo, buts it’s coinbase they will sneak fees into it I’m sure.

No pow coin can scale. And btc is the coin of millionaires now, so high fees don't matter. The little guy will have to buy and hold on some robinhood equivalent.

>>28759553
keked and basepilled

>>28771362
I want the fees even highier though. That will incentivize miners, drive the hashrate higher and confer more security. More security means more big dollars like Tesla, and Mike Saylor. More big money means I buy a second classic car.

>>28756712
If only there was some sort of (masternode) infrastructure to support lightning and other layer 2 like connext..... oh wait it's fucking stakenet xsn.

>>28771362
sure thing you can still make it but first have to get your mental health in order.

>>28771440
Haha ok!
Fees will be higher than Block reward in the middle of this year for BTC... Good luck.
Then it comes down to utility.

Saylor doesn't have the first clue about what Bitcoin is.
Number go up...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjsJpdQax8A

>>28771103
https://github.com/vbuterin/cult-of-craig

>>28771569
LOl I own lots of that one too.
So much that I haven't worked a day since 2014.. but keep up with the 4 chan psychoanalysis because you certainly can't quote anything I said that was incorrect.

>>28771640
>Then it comes down to utility.
no it doesn't. Gold has limited utility. Wire transfers fucking suck. Bank accounts are a pain. Utility has very very little to do with this equation.

>>28771706
yes of course we will believe your larp without you proving anything like signing with an address that had balance in 2014 or something... that's how it obviously works in your mind.

also there was no real double spend, the tx that got confirmed was not broadcasted on 21th, and the amount was not $21. no other problems with that made up bullshit.

how much further do you wish to embarrass yourself?

>>28771964
>yes of course we will believe your larp without you proving anything like signing with an address that had balance in 2014 or something... that's how it obviously works in your mind.
well I've actually personally seen him sign that wallet...in person. so you should believe me, I'm pretty pretty tough to fool.

>>28771964
also note that the tx broadcasted at 21:21 was not included in either blocks... it's like fucktards can't stop sperging.

>>28772112
:D i see

>>28772143
Uh Huh
https://forkmonitor.info/stale/btc/666833

On January 21st a transaction from one set of addresses showed in both blocks with outputs of 0.00062063 and 0.00014499 BTC (total 0.00076562 BTC). The sending addresses had a total of 0.00071095 BTC only.

>>28771566
THIS. I'm surprised /biz/ isn't talking about this on a regular basis. This board fucking fell in the gutter after LINK.

>>28756712
>"ownership" on steam
nitwit
>purchasing with bitcoin
midwit
>why yes I would like to own these videogames by acquiring the NFTs
high IQ

>>28772318
and? bitcoin worked exactly as it was designed to work. no coins were spent twice on the longest chain. and at the moment when two competing chains existed they were both the longest chain and they were both intact with no double spend on them either.

>>28772742
"So, to the BTC perfectionists, money was removed from a wallet, given to another, and the block was erased. Someone who received a transaction and had a block confirmation had their transaction reversed, but this is NOT news and NOT a double spend according to the high priests of BTC Core and their surrogates. "

--some internet dude

and it did happen on the 21st, so more obfuscation from you. The guy who still can't show a quote.
https://forkmonitor.info/stale/btc/666833

>>28756712
No, they can't. Not after the Blockstream takeover. That's the point.

>>28771566
stfu anon, not yet

>>28756712
>Do you accept gold coins and bullions?
This is how you sound. You don't spend bitcoin, you sell it.

>>28756712
never. stop pumping this fucking crap thinking you'll ever buy something with it. it's unusable and MUST die. Forget LN, forget this useless garbage, use stablecoins for now.

>>28760567
Bitfinex uses lightning.
Kraken will use lightning in Q1.
OkEx will use lightning soon also.
Stakenet Dex is already using lightning.
More will come.

Sounds to me like you are nothing but a ignorant troll

>>28756712
Can they fucking start scaling this thing already?

>>28764616
All the REAL Bitcoin devs are working on BTC.
Not on that scam fork of yours.
But you can have it.
Keep buying that Scammers bags and go broke.

>>28764942
Yes Bitcoin is NOT a currency.
IT'S MONEY!!!
Learn the difference you moron.
It's easy to make a currency. SV is just like that among a ocean of other coins working as currency /fiat.
But only Bitcoin fulfills the role as money like gold.

Now go take a hike dummy.

>>28756761
This. Wasting bitcoin on steam games is retarded.

>>28773067
no it didn't the transactions were broadcasted on 18th, 19th and 20th.
the orphaned block being mined n 21st is by accident obviously not some master plan design set in motion on the 18th.

the whole number mysticism is retarded.

bitcoin worked as expected except for one single thing... we normally expect the highest fee tx being confirmed in the longest chain and in this case the lowest fee earliest tx got confirmed. that was unexpected but nothing groundbreaking.

when you broadcast two conflicting tx you have no way of knowing which one will be included in the end.

>>28774322
i would argue that money is a currency that is legal tender. so bitcoin is most definitely not money.

>>28764619
fuck em. they deserve everything they get. which is nothing. I reckon 99 percent of people on this thread have not read the white paper.

>>28774960
>they deserve everything they get.
700% gains and counting since sv is a thing. yes we do.

>>28774522
>the whole number mysticism is retarded.
it goes back to the death cult thing. Feeling in control of the uncontrollable. literally cope is what it is. very sad, many such cases

>>28775342
oh and 2350% since the bch fork... we also deserve that.

>>28775342
what is bitcoin? can you describe it to me?

>>28775535
yeah i noticed that sv works like a cult kinda. they have their own cult lingo their own shared reality separate from everyone else. their own weird contradictory mythology.
it doesn't have to make sense or be logical if you repeat it enough.

>>28772461
The fudding actually works. Fork of DASH,POSW exit scam etc.

>>28775641
there is no single answer to that. more like 7 or 8 depending on which aspect we are talking about.

>>28775641

>>28775807
corecucks ladies and gents. you are an absolute fucking mong.

>>28775913
no, you are just a brainlet. like all cashies with the sole exception of peter rizun. i don't know what his damage is but he is not stupid.

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

>>28775911
now show me where satoshi said bitcoin can be a minority hash shitfork of a minority hash shitfork!

>>28776206
show me where satoj said off chain scaling

>>28776206
The Satoshi white paper explains Bitcoin is intended to be a “peer-to-peer electronic cash system” that makes Internet commerce payments more cost efficient, including for “small casual transactions.”

Despite the clear intent of Bitcoin’s creator to scale the network and establish it as more efficient infrastructure for online payments, the Bitcoin Core protocol developers who assumed control of the Bitcoin project rejected scaling – limiting on-chain capacity to a maximum of 7 transactions per second, driving transaction fees sky-high; so now BTC is promoted as “digital gold” and a “store of value” reserve asset, rather than as the system of peer-to-peer electronic cash for daily use envisioned by Satoshi. The BTC network further strayed with the introduction of Segregated Witness (SegWit) which is a FORK!
Don't believe me ?
https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/

Bitcoin SV has almost entirely restored Satoshi’s Bitcoin protocol, with no default limit on the size of the blocks on its blockchain and thus its transaction capacity. It also restored many of Satoshi’s original technical functions—such as removing artificial limits on the size and capabilities of transactions, and restoring the full original functionality of Bitcoin Script (the programming language used within the Bitcoin protocol). With unbounded scaling, transaction fees remain minimal and predictable—the median transaction fee on the Bitcoin SV network in 2020 was generally less than 1/100 of a U.S. cent.

Read the original website and particularly Bullet 3
https://web.archive.org/web/20101118005539/http://www.bitcoin.org/
'Bitcoin transactions are practically free'

Bitcoin SV is doing a great thing for the block-space.
Bitcoin IS supposed to be peer-to-peer electronic cash and NOT digital gold.
The man gets 32 MB Block sizes moving all day long on the chain and 9,000 transaction per seconds and people call BSV a pump and dump.

>>28775747
>it doesn't have to make sense or be logical
traditionally death cults actually get stronger when the apocalypse *doesnt* happen. The die-hards are the only ones left, they are the ones the indoctrinate the new hires going forward, and this creates a really strong memetic vortex. Similar to the Q phenom.

>>28776409
>The Satoshi white paper explains Bitcoin is intended to be a “peer-to-peer electronic cash system” that makes Internet commerce payments more cost efficient, including for “small casual transactions.”
and it did this, for almost a decade. Did this so well that hundreds of billions of dollars came running into the system. this inflow changed the fundamentals behind bitcoin and the fundamental reasons for buying bitcoin. And that's a good thing, people need a savings account with real yield more than they need to replace cash. Times change, objectives change. The price action alone tells us all you are still wrong though; noone cares about "the protocol", just like no one cares about the tithe or ex-communication or angering the spirits.

>>28775777
Checked and based. Is /biz/ going to make it this time?

>>28777051
No YOU and everyone making money don't care if the protocol changes.
The White Paper IS the protocol and that was not included in the MIT license.

Satoshi was clear from the beginning that changing the block size was the answer to scaling.

>Quote from satoshi:
>It can be phased in, like:
>
>if (blocknumber > 115000)
> maxblocksize = largerlimit

>It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
> When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.

> Satoshi Nakamoto, on bitcointalk.org, October 04, 2010, 07:48:40 PM

Segwit changed the protocol...

>>28777353
yep, all these blockstream core fanatics think they're smarter than satoshi

>>28777459
That's because Blockstream is OWNED by the 2nd largest Derivatives company on earth and they pay VERY well to people that push the small block bullshit.
We are all Satoshi..blah blah blah

They forget the block size arguments from 4 years ago and follow the Digital Gold number go up mantra.
https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@adambalm/the-truth-about-who-is-behind-blockstream-and-segwit-as-the-saying-goes-follow-the-money

>>28777334
doubt it

>>28778036
I can't believe they are sleeping on it. Makes me wonder how many oldfags are in and how many newfags are in..

>>28776315
that's obviously a new development. and it's fucking amazing.

so you got nothing on the minority hash shitfork then?


>The proof-of-work also solves the problem of determining representation in majority decision making. If the majority were based on one-IP-address-one-vote, it could be subverted by anyone able to allocate many IPs. Proof-of-work is essentially one-CPU-one-vote. The majority decision is represented by the longest chain, which has the greatest proof-of-work effort invested in it. If a majority of CPU power is controlled by honest nodes, the honest chain will grow the fastest and outpace any competing chains.
>Nodes can leave and rejoin the network at will, accepting the proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone. They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them. Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism.

also segwit has NOTHING to do with bitcoins usecase. it being store of value or not. segwit is a new transaction structure that absolutely makes sense. it separates the financial transaction necessary to build the utxo set from the sigscript required for validating that transaction. it also makes taproot merkle tree sigscripts possible which allow you to use arbitrarily big sigscripts/smart contracts with a 1mb main block.

>>28776706
it's not just similar but probably the same demographics. maybe one day scientists can identify the brain defects on mri leading to this.

>>28777353
>Segwit changed the protocol...
not really it's a stricter ruleset which means it's completely valid by the original ruleset. unlike bcash that completely mangled and broke the consensus algo.

>>28778453
newfags have no idea what they are getting into in the first place with crypto so they don't understand what's wrong in the dex space and why layer 2 is so important for onchain congestion.

>>28777353
>No YOU and everyone making money don't care if the protocol changes.
I like how you exclude yourself from the group making money.
>>28778761
its not a defect at all. Seeing intentionally in an essentially random environment is fundamental to survival. Would you call huge titties a "chest defect"?

>>28756712
>spending bitcoin
that's retarded anon.

to late my friends its over, 3 million without power and freezing in texas alone