Honest questions

[Anonymous No.14009044]

Why does BSV have to exist when there's already BCH?
Even if Craig is Satoj, why should someone dump their BTC for this new coin?

[Anonymous No.14009061]

>>14009044
Bch decided layer 2 was cool, so are protocol changes and that scaling on chain was centralization. BSV is Bitcoin, it couldn't be more obvious.

[Anonymous No.14009077]

>>14009044
BCH forked because of layer 2.
Now they want to add it

Honestly, i think Roger is simply not really interested anymore much in the progress anymore (not speaking about overall progress) and it's the team behind that got infested, just like with BTC.

[Anonymous No.14009104]

>>14009044
> Why does a coin exist that seeks to get back to the original purposes of BTC when there's a different protocol available
Gee I dunno

[Anonymous No.14009134]

>>14009104
Isn't that why BCH exists though? Roger insists BCH is Bitcoin

[Anonymous No.14009178]

>>14009044
fucking newfags. If you were around for the bullrun in late 2017 you would have seen that sending transactions cost an arm and a leg. BTC doesn't scale and core's solution is segshit and hurr durr lightning network. Big blocks are the best way to scale and SV as the biggest blocks, and so much more.

[Anonymous No.14009268]

>>14009178
BCH was made to fix the problems you stated. Why buy BSV and not BCH?

[Anonymous No.14009286]

>>14009268
Why are you completely ignoring the first two posts?

[Anonymous No.14009296]

>>14009268
BSV is going to have 2gb blocks in a few months, which is bigger than BCH. Also the metanet, Calvin, Craig, the tulip trust, and more.

[Anonymous No.14009302]

Because BCH is a protocol fork

[Anonymous No.14009322]

>>14009302
I forgot about this. BSV has its checkpoint at the genesis block. BCH created a new checkpoint during the fork.

[Anonymous No.14009324]

Satoshi Nakomato (Craig wright) is about to brute force that god protocol signature and destroy the whole market with his 1mio genesis block bitcoins.

[Anonymous No.14009386]

>>14009268
A lot of things are designed to do things they fail to do. BCH has a limit on the size of blocks, BSV does not, which in theory allows it to scale forever.

[Anonymous No.14009414]

>>14009061
>>14009077
>>14009296
>>14009302
>>14009324
>>14009386
Thank you for your helpful answers. I thought all the BSV shilling was just holder bias and hopeful cope. I plan on buying some now

[Anonymous No.14009649]

>>14009324
Any time now, just you wait!

[Anonymous No.14009717]

It's pretty ridiculous how great BSV has been doing considering how hard it is to buy.
Maybe it was delisted from Binance to keep its price suppressed.

Any suggestions on best way to get some Craig bucks (BSV)?

[Anonymous No.14009751]

>>14009717

nigga you click on a coin on coinmarketcap.com

then you click on the exchanges tab

[Anonymous No.14009782]

>>14009044
BCH was thinking of going towards SegWit and LN. On-chain scaling was yet again being thrown away. Craig didnt want any of that shit, so he left and took the important devs with him.

[Anonymous No.14009860]

>>14009077
Isn't metanet a L2?

[Anonymous No.14009896]

>>14009860
no?

however it supports upper-layer protocols like UDP, TCP and so on

[Anonymous No.14009997]

>>14009896
what is it? is it literally just "paste it all to the blockchain in full"?

[Anonymous No.14010009]

>>14009997
educate yourself

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXpHHZqe6vI

[Anonymous No.14010031]

>>14009717
Hello Anon

Did you ever wonder why
> BSV is nowhere shilled but here?
> no serious crypto geek/institution considers it legit?
> Link shills disappeared overnight and the Vishnu shills appeared with the same intensity?
> it pumped while all other coins bleed with BTC?

;o)

[Anonymous No.14010054]

>>14010031
we (bsv) were during link 30 threads per hour here.

they simply got rekt and left

>no serious crypto geek/institution considers it legit?

would you tell everyone that your enemy, satoshi, is legit? even vitalik said "if at the end he is satoshi, i will think differently of satoshi"


S-T-I-F-F

[Anonymous No.14010078]

>>14010054
Vitalik never said that you retarded braindead faggot

"If I see indisputable evidence that CSW is Satoshi, it would change my opinion of Satoshi more than it would change my opinion of CSW."

Keep holding your piece of shit meme token

[Anonymous No.14010120]

>>14010078
https://twitter.com/VitalikButerin/status/1033357036434726914


I AM UNIRONICALLY SO FUCKING STIFF OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I HAVE TO HIDE HOW STIFF I AM
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Anonymous No.14010147]

>>14010031
Is it all just a big honk? It seems like a good enough coin, and all I really care about is profit

[Anonymous No.14010159]

>>14010120
I'm starting to love these Craig memes

[Anonymous No.14010161]

>>14010031
youve really activated my almonds

[Anonymous No.14010167]

>>14010009
If no one can roughly outline what metanet's relation to BSV is and how it uses BSV a few sentences, I'm just going to assume you don't understand and have been taken for a ride by Meister Craig.

[Anonymous No.14010180]

>>14010167
i will look down to you, dont worry

[Anonymous No.14010311]

>>14010147
sure there is profit for the ones that know how to play the others, and if you're not one of them, you damn sure are the latter ;)

>>14010054
it's called brainwashing. repeat something long enough and people start believing it. vitalik said bsv is a complete scam ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggyABjicZt8&t=200s ) and his twitter post (from August 2018 btw) actually says "If I see indisputable evidence that CSW is Satoshi, it would change my opinion of Satoshi more than it would change my opinion of CSW." which has a complete different meaning. But being someone who falls easily for scams you probably aren't able to comprehend that either :)

[Anonymous No.14010350]

>>14010311
>would you tell everyone that your enemy, satoshi, is legit?

so, vitalik, the pedophile, claims SV is a scam. he has yet to explain how it is. shouldn't be that difficult, right?

[Anonymous No.14010374]

BCH made itself illegal with OP_Datasigverify. Just because authorities haven't acted yet, doesn't mean they will.


Their devs refuse to raise the blocksize. Still 32mb, which is nothing when BSV is scaling to terabytes in 2020 and 2gb in under 2 months.

BCH also made itself illegal with Schnorr signatures. Anonimity is unironically the death sentence for coins. Again, it's not because authorities haven't acted yet, that they won't.

BCH has Avalance pre-consensus protocol which is proof of stake. PoS is communism in code-form and it eventually leads to the implosion of any cryptocurrency.

There's other reasons, such as rolling block re-org protection, but these were some of the biggest ones. People say there's no difference between these coins, but they're really missing key information.

[Anonymous No.14010397]

BCH made itself illegal with OP_Datasigverify. Just because authorities haven't acted yet, doesn't mean they won't.

Their devs refuse to raise the blocksize. Still 32mb, which is nothing when BSV is scaling to terabytes in 2020 and 2gb in under 2 months.
BCH also made itself illegal with Schnorr signatures. Anonimity is unironically the death sentence for coins. Again, it's not because authorities haven't acted yet, that they won't.
BCH has Avalance pre-consensus protocol which is proof of stake. PoS is communism in code-form and it eventually leads to the implosion of any cryptocurrency.
There's other reasons, such as rolling block re-org protection, but these were some of the biggest ones. People say there's no difference between these coins, but they're really missing key information.

[Anonymous No.14010488]

https://tubee.fr/videos/watch/0ef5337c-c9df-4a2a-97e1-e6437835a654

[Anonymous No.14010493]

>>14010350
… and bsv zombies have yet to explain why it isn't a scam. Even if Vitalik would publish a scientific report that proves 100% BSV is a scam people like you still wouldn't believe it. And that's why I'm not discussing with dogmatic people like you. It's like talking to a wall. Enjoy your dumpsterfire ;)

[Anonymous No.14010522]

>>14010493
usually you have to proof your claims

calling a crypto on the original bitcoin chain a scam is quite stupid.

but hey... natural selection

[Anonymous No.14010549]

Because the government hasn't coopted the BCH team like they did with BTC. BSV was created because they failed to.

[Anonymous No.14010685]

>>14009414
get better at shilling sanjoy

[Anonymous No.14010695]

>>14009324
he's been saying this shit for years, also that he was going to break segwit and crash the whole market. Never happened

[Anonymous No.14010704]

>>14009044
I just farted and it stinks so heinous I almost vomited.

[Anonymous No.14010740]

>>14009044
> Why does BSV have to exist when there's already BCH?
Because Satoj wanted to control protocol development and raise the blocksize to unsustainable levels (which forced him to do 6 block reorgs on his own blockchain by accident) while doing nothing to optimise the software to support those big blocks
>>14009061
> Bch decided layer 2 was cool
Layer 2 was never a priority and isn't being worked on on BCH. But it could be worked on if layer 1 is perfectly optimised, and BCH is already way ahead compared to BSV
> so are protocol changes
The REAL Satoshi named his bitcoin client version 0.1 because the protocol wasn't final. Sanjay is relying on braindead supporters not to understand that. Meanwhile his version while claimed to be the same as bitcoin 0.1 is INCREDIBLY FAR from it. Their newly added OP_LSHIFT and OP_RSHIFT are 100% incompatible with bitcoin 0.1, BCH is actually closer to the original (for now).
> and that scaling on chain was centralization
bullshit. All we claimed is that scaling on chain while the protocol is only working well with up to 22MB blocks sustained means we need to first optimise and then raise caps. Unlike BSV who suffered reorgs of their own chain because even with 100% of their mining power being in the same datacenter, blocks still couldn't propagate lmfao.
> BSV is Bitcoin
It's not.
>>14009077
>Now they want to add it
Nobody is rushing to add any sort of layer 2, we're just working on layer 1 instead of paying for pajeet shills

[Anonymous No.14010777]

>>14009104
> Why does a coin exist that seeks to get back to the original purposes of BTC when there's a different protocol available
lies
BSV is farther away from the original unfinished protocol, due to their recent additions of OP_LSHIFT and OP_RSHIFT which are 100% incompatible with the original bitcoin
>>14009134
There needs to be one version of bitcoin that isn't run by criminals and early adopters Roger and Jihan are heavily investing in it.
>>14009178
BCH has big enough blocks to have low fees, while transactions aren't accidentally being reversed either.
>>14009268
If you're a fan of pajeet shilling buy BSV. If you want scalable bitcoin with active development, optimizations being made to support scaling AND the ability to trade without a central entity ( https://chainbulletin.com/bitcoin-com-is-launching-a-localbitcoins-competitor/ ) ONLY POSSIBLE THANKS TO OP_CHECKDATASIG - then BCH is your coin.
>>14009296
BSV suffers accidental reorgs due to its inability to handle 128MB blocks, hurr durr let's increase the blocksize without doing any optimizations.
>>14009302
Just like BSV which introduced OP_LSHIFT and OP_RSHIFT which are incompatible with bitcoin

[Anonymous No.14010793]

>>14010740
have i posted any lie? the split is because BCH devs went full commie retard wanting to copy in every sense the BTC development which was the reason for the split before.

facts are facts, stop being a commie trying to rewrite the history

[Anonymous No.14010804]

>>14010777
Brainlet, it's the same old protocol with a few useful things added on top. Everything that worked before works all the same still. Satoshi's vision

[Anonymous No.14010814]

>>14009322
BSV has multiple checkpoints during every former BTC and BCH network update, but similarly to Sanjay, you have never seen bitcoin's code so you couldn't know.
>>14009324
Like he accomplished any of his previous threats, lmfao.
>>14009386
> BCH has a limit on the size of blocks
truth is, BCH can handle 32MB blocks right now, which BSV would struggle with despite having all miners in the same room. Increasing block size before cleaning up the software mess doesn't do shit for scaling, but then again nobody uses BSV so no-one's transactions are getting reversed. Their code is still almost the same as Bitcoin ABC, plus two changes that are incompatible with bitcoin
>>14009414
>I thought all the BSV shilling was just holder bias and hopeful cope.
It's not, it's Calvin's money being spent on pajeets because he can't find good developers.
>>14009717
BSV is on Huobi, the longest lasting big exchange with insane volume. It's easy to buy.
>>14009782
>BCH was thinking of going towards SegWit and LN.
imagine actually believing this>>14010009
>listen to technobabble
>>14010031
based
>>14010078
>>14010120
lmfao

[Anonymous No.14010828]

>>14010397
>BCH made itself illegal with OP_Datasigverify. Just because authorities haven't acted yet, doesn't mean they won't.
BSV has pedo porn on every node that's running it. BCH does not. Lmfao at claiming anything about DATASIGverify

[Anonymous No.14010860]

>>14010793
Yes, you posted a number of lies and I corrected them. You're welcome.
>>14010804
>Brainlet, it's the same old protocol with a few useful things added on top.
BCH - yes. BSV - nope, it's a copy+paste of Bitcoin ABC + 2 incompatible changes. You'd know that if you could code.
> Everything that worked before
It worked before because of BCH devs. Now that they're replaced by pajeets at BSV we're getting accidental 6-block reorgs

[Anonymous No.14010864]

BSV is the choice for low IQ people, and for very obvious reasons. Imagine a coin whose entire existence hinges on a theory that is about to busted in just half a year. Wew, lad

[Anonymous No.14010873]

>>14010860
for example? you even said that i was right but that they will concentrate later on it instead of right now... YOU CONFIRMED WHAT I SAID

[Anonymous No.14010904]

>>14010873
There's no layer 2 in discussion right now because there's a ton of work to be done on l1.
Just because nobody is saying "even if l2 is the only way forward because we hit a scaling ceiling, we'd still stick to l1 and crash out network" doesn't mean BCH is moving to l2 lmfao.
You also made it sound that BCH devs love protocol changes, while BSV has added more incompatible protocol changes than BCH. Those in BCH are already heavily utilised ( https://chainbulletin.com/bitcoin-com-is-launching-a-localbitcoins-competitor ) while those in BSV are just staying there to show the world that BSV has nothing to do with Bitcoin 0.1.

[Anonymous No.14010922]

>>14010904
1 name
Clemens Ley

should i post more? you dirty communist piece of shit

[Anonymous No.14010932]

>>14010860
Fuck off, BCH forked off the protocol with CTOR and Amaury's rolling checkpointing. Your FUD is shitty, anyone with half a brain can git diff Bitcoin SV 0.2.0 and Bitcoin ABC 0.17.0 to see how much has changed.. it's about 100k new LOC and removal of a shit ton of bloat. The new stuff includes e.g. parallelization of tx validation, there's a whole new threadpool class and everything. Knowers know.. fuck you

[Anonymous No.14010944]

>>14010904
>>14010922
i will give you 1 more because you're such a dirty communist

Mark B Lundeberg

[Anonymous No.14010964]

>>14010932
Why can't CSW code?

[Anonymous No.14010969]

>>14010860
This guy is unironically shilling bcash, lol

[Anonymous No.14010983]

>>14010964
Pretty sure he can, you can watch in youtube vids of craig giving it lectures to graduate students.. he even has ascii tulip as his login message :)

[Anonymous No.14011013]

>>14010983
He can't, his videos are literally a description of the terminal. He doesn't understand Turing completeness (have you even read his garbage?), he doesn't understand the difference between int and float, he makes tons of noobie mistakes.

[Anonymous No.14011086]

>>14011013
Try harder shill, turing completeness of Bitcoin was already proved. Craig was also right about selfish mining being nonsense, won the bet against Peter R, explained double hashing while nobody else could. He k ows Bitcoin 10x better than anyone else. Just fuck off

[Anonymous No.14011109]

>>14011086
You don't prove Turing completeness by redefining terms. Have you read his nonsense?
>We can deduce that all Turing Complete programs and functions form a subset of the set of all possible programs. The set of all possible programs includes both those that halt on a Turing machine (that are decidable) as well as those that would run infinitely looping without end.
Literally pseudoscience.

[Anonymous No.14011173]

>>14010922
So I gave you 10 instances in which CSW lied, 5 instances in which you lied, I explained how BSV doesn't work and your response is a name. LMFAO.
>>14010932
Nope, BSV and BCH both forked.
BSV added incompatible OP_LSHIFT and OP_RSHIFT (which nobody uses).
BCH added CHECKDATASIG (which is already being used) and CTOR (which allows it to scale better than BSV) .
Sorry that reality doesn't align with the propaganda you've been reading lmfao.

[Anonymous No.14011195]

>>14011173
no... you said
>Nobody is rushing to add any sort of layer 2, we're just working on layer 1 instead of paying for pajeet shills

which is obviously a lie and have posted 2 names that confirm your lie

[Anonymous No.14011203]

P.S.
Even if:
>Craig was Satoshi (fucking lol)
>BSV could scale (fucking lol)
>BSV could even function normally without suffering from reorgs (fucking lol)
>BSV script was Turing Complete (fucking lol)
>BSV wasn't a scam shilled by pajeets (lol)
>Calvin could get his team to actually produce ASICs that are not 99% less efficient than Jihan's (LMFAO)
>Calvin and Sanjay got to 90% of all SHA256 hashing power
BSV would still fail because Roger and Jihan saw through the provocations and didn't dump their BSV. Both combined hold more than 10% of the circulating supply and whenever Calvin and Sanjay decide to act and fake pump their shitcoin to #1, they would just dump and get rich at Calvin's expense

[Anonymous No.14011385]

>>14011109
This is probably Emin or some retarded bcash dev. RES tagged

[Anonymous No.14011401]

>>14009044
the same reason because pic related

[Anonymous No.14011482]

>>14011385
Wut? Can't you see that CSW doesn't even understand the basics of programming?

>Craig:
>bitcoin is an integer value
>so people don't seem to realize that the decimal point is only what you display in your wallet
>there's a fixed decimal and I believe things are probably getting better in some of the modern chips and whatever else but the reality is, there's only so much range before you start getting errors and rounding and processing and you can't have processing errors, you can't have rounding errors, it's a little bit overly conservative, you could actually expand it a couple bits, but it's better to be conservative, and not perfect, I mean after all it's 2 [unintelligible] bits

Literally confusing integers (fixed points) with floats.

[Anonymous No.14011533]

>>14011482
Not at all, you literally don't understand shit

[Anonymous No.14011546]

>>14011533
He's referring to floating point precision loss. Do you know what that means?

[Anonymous No.14011610]

>>14011546
Yes, you're deliberately misunderstanding what he is saying

[Anonymous No.14011648]

>>14011610
He's incompetent. Give it up.

[Anonymous No.14012083]

>>14011648
He is Satoshi this is undeniable fact

[Anonymous No.14012212]

>>14012083
Sure thing, why would he always quote his forum posts otherwise

[Anonymous No.14012240]

>>14012083
I deny it. At best he was involved on the fringes of the team. There is even a direct quote from Creg saying Dave Kleiman is Satoshi, not that you can trust what Creg says.
Which is kind of my point, he contradicts himself all the time and you guys just seem dazzled by the suit and big story and let him away with it. Classic con man.

[Anonymous No.14012763]

>>14009061
>>14009077
>>14009178
>>14009296
>>14009322
>>14009302
>>14009414
>>14009324
>>14009386
India is the most pathetic place on earth
You smell bad, are ugly little manlets with a tiny micro dick and a low IQ

[Anonymous No.14013822]

>>14009268
>>14009044
They fucked up the economic equilibria introducing CTOR, now miners have to sort transactions alphabetically which makes the system easier to attack and fucks with miners