Explain yourself BTC maximalists

[Anonymous No.13020403]

SegWit was a protocol added to the Bitcoin Core (BTC) blockchain in August of 2017. What SegWit basically does on a blockchain is remove some signature data from Bitcoin transactions. This was supposed to make extra space for transactions in a block. However, if Bitcoin (BTC) 'Corers' really wanted to fit more transactions in a block, why would they instead limit the block the block size to 1Mb?

[Anonymous No.13020420]

fuck, i love bitcoin but the announcement from core about 300kb blocks makes me suicidal. why do they want crypto to die? if bitcoin blocks were scaling in 2017 bull who knows how high we would be now, maybe bitcoin wouldn't even have a dollar value at this point. but no they let the kikes kill bitcoin. fuck core and fuck you too op you nigger.

[Anonymous No.13020434]

seriously man. Imagine if we were scaling in Dec 2017. There would be celebrations everyday as we reach new block heights. "1GB BLOCK CELEBRATION THREAD" but nope fuck the 4th financial revolution lets just sell our kike sidechains to unbeknownst normalfags who don't understand how fucking high the stakes are. what do we do to save crypto?

[Anonymous No.13020437]

>>13020403
>>13020403
blockstream is a company that wants to make money off bitcoin. It's pretty simple. Smaller blocks = more sidechain use = more money for blockstream

[Anonymous No.13020455]

>>13020437
This. They hate miners they want to capture the rewards miners get without actually doing any work

[Anonymous No.13020465]

>>13020403
>>13020420
The five neckbeards who control the bitcoin repo are economically retarded and the miners are too uncoordinated and stupid to do their duty and run something other than core, thanks in part to a social media campaign that smeared Gavin and Mike Hearn.
Core has delayed bitcoin's progress by at least 3 fucking years, but the one silver lining to the whole thing is that their incompetence gave smart money time to load up on BCH/BSV. If you have not at least tripled your stack on the winning fork you are probably a useful idiot and deserve to be poor.

[Anonymous No.13020473]

>>13020434
>what do we do
As an investor: sell BTC for BSV. As a bitcoiner: bring this shit to the attention of the NPCs until they can't ignore it anymore. Their house of cards can't last forever and we can accelerate the collapse.

[Anonymous No.13020524]

>>13020403
to keep the network decentralized you brainlet so every user can run his own node easily if he wants to

>>13020420
>if bitcoin blocks were scaling in 2017 bull who knows how high we would be now
yeah, because the bullrun happened because of merchant adoption and scaling actually mattered lmao

>>13020434
if big blocks are so great why isn't your bcash or some other bsv gaining muh mainstream adoption? huh? Roger always bitched about muh merchant adoption, buying things with crypto and all that BS, why aren't people swarming to use bch, bsv or some other fast insecure centralized shitcoin?

>>13020437
you're exactly right, they are making a shitload of money on all those sidechains, kek, go buy some more bsv you brainlet

>>13020455
miners are gonna mine whatever it profitable, no one needs to kiss their asses, they will mine btc whether they like it or not, otherwise they'll go broke with their useless hardware, facilities and electricity

[Anonymous No.13020625]

>>13020524
corecuck detected

[Anonymous No.13020665]

>>13020524
>so every user can run his own node easily if he wants to
Why would John and Jane Doe want to run a full node? They just want to by their starbucks coffe and get on with their normie life. Mutelating bitcoin in the name of decentralizing is retarded. Bitcoin is secured through economic incentives, not neckbeards with Rasberry Phi's. Read the white paper to learn more about this.

>if big blocks are so great why isn't your bcash or some other bsv gaining muh mainstream adoption
But BSV are. Pay attention and keep up to date if you want to make money.

>miners are gonna mine whatever it profitable, no one needs to kiss their asses, they will mine btc whether they like it or not
BTC will not be profitable to mine after the next halving. It simply lacks the transaction volume to compensate the drop in block subsidy after the next halving.


Learn or burn. It's your choice. I'm not going to bother holding your hand again.

[Anonymous [O1G] No.13020677]

>>13020403
>What SegWit basically does on a blockchain is remove some signature data from Bitcoin transactions.
no, only from segwit transactions.
>why would they instead limit the block the block size to 1Mb?
the morons thought a financial incentive would be a good idea for pushing (untried and untrusted) segwit adoption. it will pass.

[Anonymous [O1G] No.13020685]

>>13020420
>announcement from core about 300kb blocks
that's just luke-jr being a retarded cunt ignore him!

[Anonymous No.13020726]

>>13020524

[Anonymous No.13020737]

>>13020677
>>13020685
>Yiddish damage control

[Anonymous No.13020761]

>>13020465

>smart money time to load up on BCH/BSV. If you have not at least tripled your stack on the winning fork you are probably a useful idiot and deserve to be poor.

Smart Money. Loading up on BCH/BSV. The winning fork. KEK

[Anonymous [O1G] No.13020773]

>>13020761
>worlds most expensive gay divorce to date

[Anonymous [O1G] No.13020802]

>>13020737
>can't make a counter-argument
>get frustrated
>jews did it!

[Anonymous No.13020812]

>>13020403
Checkmate, BTC maximalistfags

[Anonymous No.13020826]

Cringe bcash thread

[Anonymous No.13020837]

>>13020403
>he doesn't know

[Anonymous No.13020877]

[Anonymous [O1G] No.13020882]

>>13020812
dunno why you would think that
the logic behind it is quiet simple (not saying i like it very much at all)
>bitcoin can't scale as is
>increasing the block size is just a short term patch
>does not look very sustainable
>long term will lead to total centralization abandoning a couple of btc's core tenets
>lightning is a medium term trustless scaling solution also a solution for retail and micro payments
>lightning needs malleability fixed
>let's fix malleability
>don't want to break protocol
>let's do it in a way of an opt-in update
>okay now we figured out how to keep the network together
>but nobody fucking uses it because they don't have to
>let's push segwit adoption by making legacy more expensive by constraining block size!

that's what happened. i think btc needed both the $50 transaction fee as really damaging in the height of the last craze. even tho it's back to normal btc adoption suffered greatly because of these imbeciles miscalculating.

also true that lightning needs bigger blocks to scale anywhere. true scaling for daily commerce and retail (like visa levels) is only possible with hundred megabyte blocks and extensive reliance on ln both.

[Anonymous No.13020899]

>>13020882
Bitcoin cash can have lightning AND 100 MB blocks. Looks like bcore is finished

[Anonymous [O1G] No.13020924]

>>13020899
bitcoin can have bigger blocks too, we just need to curb-stomp luke-jr and the rest of the retard will get the message.

[Anonymous No.13020948]

>>13020924
Why would they do that now? Nothing indicates that they have any intention of raising the block size. At least Bcash devs are open to new ideas if old ones don't work

[Anonymous No.13020953]

>>13020924
I love how coretards have gone from complete denial to now saying "it's just a few bad apples"
Like watching the collapse of a communist state. Good riddance. Make sure you send your worthless corecoin to a burn address before you kys, faggot.

[Anonymous No.13020981]

>>13020899
It is bcash tho

[Anonymous No.13020983]

>>13020403
They want the potential to mine your own transactions from your phone, if you're being discriminated against by the mining cartels.

[Anonymous [O1G] No.13021087]

>>13020948
>Nothing indicates that they have any intention of raising the block size.
like i said they will have to. it's not a question only when.
they are currently playing with a multi layered scaling solution of forward blocks (sharding basically) for settlement and ln of course for everyday micro payments.

but if it doesn't pan out they will have no choice than to increase block size to keep ln up and running.
>>13020953
>it's just a few bad apples
it's really just one as far as i'm concerned. but the core dev takes a much longer term view on scaling than almost any other team except for maybe eth.

btc will prevail of this i have no doubt if we have to string up every blockstream dev to do it then we will.

[Anonymous No.13021153]

>>13020981
Bcash is bitcoin

[Anonymous [O1G] No.13021624]

>>13021153
nah... this is the sole reason nobody likes you cashies. there is nothing wrong with a different approach proving something the hard way. nothing wrong with separate paths. but lying? that's bad.

[Anonymous No.13021653]

>>13020403
Security is the priority. Large blocksize will compromise this. Simple as that.

[Anonymous No.13021665]

>>13020665
>muh halving
the price will go up you fucking retard

[Anonymous [O1G] No.13021703]

>>13021653
no it doesn't (not in itself) it only causes propagation issues if you go full retard beyond the capability of the current internet infrastructure.

a few megabytes block is nothing extraordinary. a few gigabytes will awfully quickly get out of hand.

the worst problem with bitcoin core is the outdated sync mechanism. crypto is probabilistic anyhow. so pruning should be better supported.

[Anonymous No.13021750]

>>13021665
>the price will go up you fucking retard
why should it? Try to think

[Anonymous No.13021758]

>>13021624
The idea is that we, the users, get to chose which crypto we want to represent as bitcoin. Not that BCH or BSV is actually BTC. Noone thinks that.
I choose NANO btw. All the promise without any of the artificial limits and no miners to mess things up. Community feels like early bitcoin

[Anonymous No.13021763]

To think people think this coin can be anything more than it is right now fucking kek

[Anonymous No.13021767]

>>13021758
>community feels like early bitcoin

[Anonymous No.13021900]

>>13021767
Not all of started in December 2017

[Anonymous [O1G] No.13022819]

>>13021758
>The idea is that we, the users, get to chose which crypto we want to represent as bitcoin.
yes that's the idea sadly something went catastrophically wrong as the only group being serious about the proper open democratization of bitcoin development (unlimited) forked off with bcash.