/BSVG/ - Bitcoin SV General

[Anonymous No.16293540]

>ViaBTC embraces Bitcoin SV, adding it as default option in their wallet
https://coingeek.com/viabtc-embraces-bitcoin-sv-adding-it-as-default-option-in-their-wallet/

>The Crypto Blackpill
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOlvOiGPPio

>Genesis of a New Century
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i95kSYVUJIo

https://sv.coin.dance/blocks
https://bitcoinblocks.live/

[Anonymous No.16293547]

>>16293540
bsv is shit and creg is a fraud prove me wrong

[Anonymous No.16293558]

>>16293540
based and stiffpill'd

[Anonymous No.16293560]

These people cannot have honest intentions. There's no way they care for "honest money for the world".

Calvin Ayre: made a fortune off degenerate gamblers, completely avoids the US due to a pending misdemeanor, has the lifestyle of Epstein.
Jimmy Nguyen: a Californian patent troll lawyer, "LGBT & diversity advocate". Sleazy.
Craig Wright: has a history of forgeries even outside crypto, is under criminal investigation in Australia which he fled. Habitual liar.

My prediction is they're preparing a BSV hardfork to seize Satoshi's balances for themselves (to be announced in 2020).

[Anonymous No.16293573]

>>16293560
yes greg we've all heard your retarded thoughts before, you can go now.

[Anonymous No.16293574]

>>16293560
>>16293560

[Anonymous No.16293581]

>>16293560
if they did the price would tank tho

[Anonymous No.16293587]

>>16293560
also craig will be locked up soon how can you still peddle this scam coin its unbelievable

[Anonymous No.16293599]

wheres that 10x price increase you promised craig?
wheres the bitcoin bank you promised to build years ago?
wheres proof you got shot in south america?
wheres the lawsuit you wanted to start against twitter?
wheres the fatal segwit flaw you promised to announce?
CRAIG WRIGHT IS A LIAR AND A FRAUD AND YOU RETARDS KEEP GIVING HIM A PLATFORM IT SICKENS ME!!

[Anonymous No.16293609]

>>16293599
>CRAIG WRIGHT IS A LIAR AND A FRAUD AND YOU RETARDS KEEP GIVING HIM A PLATFORM IT SICKENS ME!!

[Anonymous No.16293612]

100+ stack
i already know i made it because im stiff and austistic as fuck

[Anonymous No.16293667]

>>16293581
the only way sv can come out maybe good from this ordeal if they burn the satoshi trove with a hardfork. craig can claim he can do that because "he is satoshi so it's not morally wrong or stealing" and removes the sword hanging above bitcoin from the beginning on one fork alone making it more scarce. which would result ina wave of speculators pumping it up above bch most likely where anyone having large amounts of bsv can unload and bank on this move.
however craig is vehemently opposed to coin burns so this won't happen.

[Anonymous No.16293676]

[Anonymous No.16293680]

>>16293540
Why is the BSV network clogged with transactions from completely useless apps?

[Anonymous No.16293704]

>>16293680
>cp
>useless

[Anonymous No.16293706]

>>16293680
>clogged
nowhere near to being clogged greg

[Anonymous No.16293718]

>>16293540
>ViaBTC embraces Bitcoin SV,
haha that's kind of funny. How long until they change their name?

[Anonymous No.16293724]

>>16293547
>prove me wrong
why do you want us to prove you wrong?

[Anonymous No.16293779]

>>16293724
he wants you to try and fail obv

[Anonymous No.16293798]

bitcoin is turing complete
you can't kill bitcoin because it is designed to survive more and more

[Anonymous No.16293808]

>>16293680
>he doesn't own a city on chain

[Anonymous No.16293820]

>>16293798
>bitcoin is turing complete
no it's not because if it was turing complete it could emulate a subleq machine

[Anonymous No.16293843]

>>16293820
>no it's not because if it was turing complete it could emulate a subleq machine
hmm interesting. Could you explain the connection?

[Anonymous No.16293858]

>>16293540
when $150

[Anonymous No.16293859]

>>16293843
subleq is the simplest turing complete language a single instruction language. any turing machine can emulate any other. if a machine can't emulate subleq it is proof of it's non turing completeness.

[Anonymous No.16293860]

>>16293798
>it's Turing complete! but only if processed off-chain!
You have no understanding of the words you're using

[Anonymous No.16293873]

>>16293859
>if a machine can't emulate subleq it is proof of it's non turing completeness.
I didn't know that. Why can't bitcoin emulate a subleq?

[Anonymous No.16293878]

>>16293873
because subleq is a looping instruction

[Anonymous No.16293892]

>>16293860
yeah you could add an external turing machine to the blockchain as tape and run an open ended contract. but how is that relevant or useful for smart contracts lol? also if you go the wolfram 101 way how are infinite long scripts doing simpler things than a 3 line c code in any way practical?

[Anonymous No.16293893]

>>16293878
So bitcoin lack the ability to loop?

[Anonymous No.16293906]

>>16293893
on purpose

[Anonymous No.16293930]

>>16293906
>on purpose
let me guess. If looping was allowed we could have an instance where an unending loop function would completely crash bitcoin?

[Anonymous No.16293943]

>>16293930
at least halt anyone trying to validate it.
there are ways to mitigate this issue complex like eth did simple like not allowing for a script to run in proportional cycles to it's fee.
but here is the thing bitcoin smart contracts are mostly stateless. they are not daos or anything. they don't actually need loops.
if you want a stateful smart contract based dapp to run on the blockchain you need a lot more work than just add a loping instruction.

[Anonymous No.16293965]

>>16293599
>32 posts and nobody can refute this

[Anonymous No.16293977]

>>16293943
But instead of a loop function, why not just copy paste the function as many times as you want to loop it? Wouldn't that do just the same? Then it would be turing complete without the problem of crashing bitcoin and the fees would be very easy to calculate

[Anonymous No.16294152]

>>16293540
wait this fag was in amsterdam?

[Anonymous No.16294280]

>>16293540
When will it be back on Binance?

[Anonymous No.16294293]

>>16293808
what is it like to have sex with girls like this? all the prostitutes i can get are all fat or old

[Anonymous No.16294310]

>>16293599
>Those digits
>Those based words
>That picture
Is, is this keku in disguise?

[Anonymous No.16294335]

>>16293560
Based

[Anonymous No.16294347]

>>16293599
>IT SICKENS ME!!
>>16293965
lmao you refute yourself by following this thread for more than 32 replies.

[Sage No.16294348]

>>16293540
SHUT
THE
FUCK
UP

you spamming shill cunts

Sage

[Anonymous No.16294729]

>>16293599
Lol this asshole....i bought a ton of BSV on exactly this statement and got horribly burned. Believed that “no one at that age (49) is that stupid to make such claims if he’s not legit. Such retards simply don’t exist. He’s got multiple Masters and a PhD, no one with this background and credentials is that stupid to make such a claim publicly when it is not truthful as lying on this equates literally towards suicide.”

If this was at least a minimum regulated market Craig by now would have not one but two new assholes drilled for that statement by the SEC and its equivalents. Fuck this guy. I would sincerely enjoy at this point if he gets murdered or suffers similar.

[Anonymous No.16294949]

>>16294335
so THIS is the true power of bsv

[Anonymous No.16295021]

>>16294729
You have an interesting point. Until CSW gets fucked by the SEC I don't think we can call crypto a "mature market"

[Anonymous No.16295169]

Good morning Stiffmarines, thanks for baking a new thread.

[Anonymous No.16295183]

>>16293560
you don't like it, STIFF

[Anonymous No.16295193]

>>16295021
This clown is especially repulsive because he tells all the time how law abiding he is and that he is to take special care to follow all rules. Then his own actions are exactly the opposite of his words. Seriously someone needs to beat him up, he’s so full of shit that he more than deserves a spanking or getting his face kicked in.

[Anonymous No.16295203]

Have any of you read through the "panopotty" posts on Bitcointalk?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=950888;sa=showPosts;start=0

There's a ton of info in here. I'm pretty sure this is Uyen Nguyen's account.

[Anonymous No.16295227]

>>16295203

"we worked there for wright in 13/14
there were around 50 devolopers in oz then
he tried to sue us when we tried to start a new co. injuncted us.

wright was using 100s of sockpupets on MtGox and Liberty reserve to pay for this

also got money from bodog gambling operations
the company used to do "contracts" for bodog
code ones"

[Anonymous No.16295247]

>>16295227

https://in.reuters.com/article/uk-bitcoin-wright-patents-idINKBN1691AY

"A person close to Wright told Reuters that Wright began working for Bodog in 2010. Ayre had set up Bodog in the 1990s. It expanded into entertainment and proved so lucrative that Ayre featured in the 2006 “billionaires” issue of Forbes magazine"

[Anonymous No.16295282]

>>16295247

[Anonymous No.16295347]

>>16295282
Is that the poker game from Satoshis first release of bitcoin? It really makes one think that bitcoin was released with a inbuilt poker game when we now know craig was heavily involved in building software for online gambling sites

[Anonymous No.16295385]

>>16295347

Yes, and what I'm really curious about is why Calvin has seemingly sidetracked the gambling tech after the BSV split.

[Anonymous No.16295414]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56272.0

Also, here are some rare Satoshi posts that were in the closed moderator forum on Bitcointalk.

"I still don't see a pegged thread about Microsoft Security Essentials Live Protection. Someone needs to write a thread telling people if they have Microsoft Security Essentials how to exempt or whatever bitcoin.exe and pin it ASAP. I'm really busy, surely someone else can do this?!!"

[Anonymous No.16295443]

>>16295385
>Calvin has seemingly sidetracked the gambling tech
What do you mean?

[Anonymous No.16295481]

>>16294280
Lol fucking never. No one wants anything to do with Craigs scam token aka bchsv

[Anonymous No.16295487]

>>16295443

When it was BCH, he talked often about building gambling tech on top of Bitcoin. After the split, I haven't seen it mentioned once.

"Search the old code for POKER

WRIGHT IS A CAsino billionaire - the last that the world does not know.
His partener and buddy Calvin Ayre is the front man.
Wright is the coder

THIS IS WHY HE WANTS YOU NOT TO BELIEVE

CHECK THE CODE! It includes Poker stubs - he removed it later ion the main core client but it is there!!!!!

Bitcoin was NOT for the people - it was so the people could GAMBLE!

IT IS IN THE EARLY CODE

Wright is a POKER player he bluffed everyone to think his hand is empty What it really is is a Billionare coder who does not need BITCOIN itself but has shitloads and also has casinos

Wright is tied to Bodog Mathews, his right hand man is the former CTO of centerbet Calvin Ayre is a Billionare casino marketer and wrights friend and partner
Wright wants to be the wizard behind the curtain. Everyone missed his deception - that he IS SATOSHI and runs a casino"

[Anonymous No.16295519]

https://theconversation.com/profiles/craig-s-wright-3334

[Anonymous No.16295694]

>>16295487
>When it was BCH, he talked often about building gambling tech on top of Bitcoin. After the split, I haven't seen it mentioned once.
If you follow him on twitter you will see that he "often" tweets about that. Tagging his old friends still in the gambling business, saying they should accept bsv. He think he even wrote a blog post recently on why bsv is the best choice for gambling sites

[Anonymous No.16295845]

>>16295487
lol'd at this

[Anonymous No.16295871]

>>16293798
>>16293820
>>16293859
BitcoinSV is turing complete.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwGRfJ0L5eQ

Now cope

[Anonymous No.16295883]

>>16294348
Seething.

[Anonymous No.16295892]

>>16293540

[Anonymous No.16295975]

>>16294348
lmao look how mad the Craig-haters are getting. A few more weeks and I fully expect people's heads to start exploding Scanners-style

[Anonymous No.16296073]

>>16295871

I wonder how hard it would be to find this code on chain. Nice pic

[Anonymous No.16296085]

>>16295871
>THEY DIED!!!!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.16296093]

>>16296073
>I wonder how hard it would be to find this code on chain. Nice pic
I think he says in that presentation that someone found out about them before it was public

[Anonymous No.16296099]

>>16296085
>>THEY DIED!!!!!!!!!!!
So sad. The core "devs" have blood on their hands. Just like every single good commie in history have

[Anonymous No.16296126]

>>16296093

I remember Desantis went on a rant about how crazy shit has been built on chain since 2009 but nobody actually realized/recognized it

[Anonymous No.16296135]

>>16293977
>Wouldn't that do just the same?
that's called rolling out loops and it only really works well for low max repetition count as nobody can produce store or validate infinite long script. a real turing machine can run an infinite program from a finite script.
>Then it would be turing complete without the problem of crashing bitcoin
not really only an infinite rolled out script could solve any problem theoretically.
>and the fees would be very easy to calculate
that part is true enough a rolled out loops cost is easily calculated just incredibly wasteful for blockspace.

[Anonymous No.16296141]

>>16295871
its sad you believe this. craig's VERY good at lying and covering his tracks. not perfect though so he gets caught from time to time. I just checked out his 'proof of turing completness' paper on which he got caught for blatant copy/paste plagiarism. seems since he got called out on this sloppy forgery that he tries to hide it but you can still get the copies on mirrors. it's just sad that this fraud continues to deceive and run around free. Everyone should remind himself that this guy is a full scale criminal that has no scruples at lying,cheating,faking and forging and that he has been proven in the past already to do so multiple times. Don't believe any of the shit he says, its all lies.

[Anonymous No.16296167]

>>16295871
it's fucking not.
also if you keep transacting the state transitions then you have an open ended contract nobody enforces it's practically entirely worthless.
the point of a script running on a blockchain is immutability and trustless execution. solidity in eth does that, the retardation criag presents does not.

[Anonymous No.16296200]

>>16296135

>a real turing machine can run an infinite program from a finite script.

Unbounded =/= infinite

https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/11/8/170/htm

[Anonymous No.16296208]

>>16296200
yeah sure

[Anonymous No.16296243]

>>16296135
>a real turing machine can run an infinite program
Is there any machines in the world that can run an infinite time?

[Anonymous No.16296261]

>>16296243
a theoretical machine (like the turing machine) can run infinitely

[Anonymous No.16296265]

>>16296208

Read the paper or piss off. It's pretty long, so I'll make sure I keep the thread bumped while you catch up.

[Anonymous No.16296280]

>>16296265
suck a horse sv nigger nobody buys your stupid shit

[Anonymous No.16296282]

>>16296261
>a theoretical machine
So no real world machine is actually turing complete?

[Anonymous No.16296309]

>>16293540
Why cant Craig move a single bitcoin out his wallet to prove he is satoshi?

[Anonymous No.16296322]

>>16296282
no real machine can run infinitely
a turing machine can run infinitely
but turing completeness requires solving finite problems

[Anonymous No.16296342]

BSV fags have no idea what "Turing completenes" is or how loops in algorithms work, but keep shouting their buzzwords whenever possible. What a pathetic scene.

[Anonymous No.16296351]

>>16296280

I beg to differ.

[Anonymous No.16296363]

>>16296351
scammers scratch each others back

[Anonymous No.16296396]

>>16296363

>Ian Grigg
>Scammer

[Anonymous No.16296416]

>>16296396
grigg and andersen both deflected attention from their friend to a willing clown obviously.

[Anonymous No.16296446]

https://bitcoinist.com/just-how-bad-is-craig-wright-at-plagiarism/ <- the fag's academic skills

[Anonymous No.16296502]

>>16296416

It must physically hurt to cope this hard

[Anonymous No.16296524]

>>16293977
>But instead of a loop function, why not just copy paste the function as many times as you want to loop it?
Because you can only do it in a select number of cases, not as a general rule. You BSV fags are using the word "Turing completeness" as a buzzword, you have no fucking idea what it means but still feel the need to always bring it up without any context and relevance. Even CSW himself eventually backed out and said that it applies not to bitcoin but rather to the "bitcoin system" which is a semantic trick and means off-chain computing.

[Anonymous No.16296576]

>>16296141
Not an argument, just unhinged schizo character attacks.

Next.

[Anonymous No.16296587]

>>16296167

[Anonymous No.16296605]

>>16296576
>hurr durr character attacks
Stop being so sycophantic and defensive over your guru

[Anonymous No.16296619]

>>16296605
Learn not to glow so hard kike, and you may not get called out so often.

[Anonymous No.16296646]

>>16296322
>no real machine can run infinitely
>a turing machine can run infinitely
>but turing completeness requires solving finite problems
So a turing complete machine can never be built as no real machine can run infinitely?


>>16296524
>You BSV fags are using the word "Turing completeness" as a buzzword, you have no fucking idea what it means
Can a machine be turing complete if it cannot run an infinite loop? Please don't be so harsh, I'm just trying to learn

[Anonymous No.16296667]

>>16296619
Nice try, but CSW literally sucked up to kike Mark Dubowitz

[Anonymous No.16296677]

>>16296605

Or at least learn to use a different writing style lol

[Anonymous No.16296686]

>>16296416
Pic related.
>>16296524
>"Turing completeness" as a buzzword, you have no fucking idea what it means but still feel the need to always bring it up without any context and relevance. Even CSW himself eventually backed out and said that it applies not to bitcoin but rather to the "bitcoin system" which is a semantic trick and means off-chain computing.
Beautiful pilpul mixed with flat out lies, Mordecai. The execution of single scripts not being TC has no bearing on what was being discussed earlier this year. Self-terminate.

[Anonymous No.16296756]

>>16296646
>Can a machine be turing complete if it cannot run an infinite loop?
An infinite loop is basically a do..while loop (or an equivalent), it has break points inside but you can't tell after how many iterations they will trigger before executing the algorithm itself

[Anonymous No.16296781]

>>16296686
It's pathetic how defensive BSV fags are over CSW and trivial bullshit he said, just pathetic

[Anonymous No.16296835]

>>16296781
It's amazing how little you can say in so many posts

[Anonymous No.16296911]

>>16296756
>it has break points inside but you can't tell after how many iterations they will trigger before executing the algorithm itself
So it could potentially be an infinite loop and you can never know? If what you are using the loop to calculate requires an infinite amount of loops, then it would mean you will never live to see the result of the calculation. Then what's even the point? And you also said no real world computer can run an infinite amount of loops. There seems to be a jump in your logic here. What am I missing?

[Anonymous No.16297002]

>>16296911
>So it could potentially be an infinite loop and you can never know?
Yes, it's called "the halting problem".

>then it would mean you will never live to see the result of the calculation. Then what's even the point?
To design proper algorithms.

>no real world computer can run an infinite amount of loops
Yes, it will freeze.

Study CS stuff.

[Anonymous No.16297043]

>>16297002
>To design proper algorithms
So if we design proper algorithms that does not require infinite looping then we don't need turing complete machines?

>Yes, it will freeze
So a turing machine can not possibly exist in the real world?

[Anonymous No.16297098]

>>16297043
>So if we design proper algorithms that does not require infinite looping then we don't need turing complete machines?
For many problems, you can't.

>So a turing machine can not possibly exist in the real world?
A theoretical one can't. An execution environment can and does.

[Anonymous No.16297149]

>>16297098
>For many problems, you can't.
So then those problems would be unsolvable as they require an infinite amount of looping and we have already established infinite looping is not possible in the real world, right?

>A theoretical one can't. An execution environment can and does.
What is the difference between a theoretical and a practical turing machine?

[Anonymous No.16297164]

>>16297149
Refer to CS stuff. I can't be bothered to spoonfeed you for long, sorry

[Anonymous No.16297229]

>>16297164
>can't be bothered
>to post on an artisinal hungarian hang gliding forum
And there it is.

[Anonymous No.16297254]

>>16297164
hmm strange. You was on the whole time, but now that we was about to get to the bottom of it you throw in the towel. Why?

[Anonymous No.16297295]

>>16297254
You can open the wiki page for the halting problem:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
But you will hardly understand anything.

[Anonymous No.16297313]

>>16297295
Why did you even engage in the discussion if you in the end just link to a wiki article? Could you not just answer my previous questions?


>>16297098
>For many problems, you can't.
So then those problems would be unsolvable as they require an infinite amount of looping and we have already established infinite looping is not possible in the real world, right?

>A theoretical one can't. An execution environment can and does.
What is the difference between a theoretical and a practical turing machine?

[Anonymous No.16297365]

>>16293540

Sage or ignore all BSV threads.

[Anonymous No.16297378]

[Anonymous No.16297385]

>>16297313
I already outlined it in layman's terms: those problems require using a do..while loop which has break points inside. An execution environment, accordingly, must be able to execute it.

[Anonymous No.16297395]

>>16297385

Take your meds

[Anonymous No.16297442]

>>16297395
He's not schizo, just a pseud out of his depth.

[Anonymous No.16297449]

>>16297385
>those problems require using a do..while loop which has break points inside
If it has a breakpoint then it is by definition infinite, right? If it is not infinite then it is by your definition not turing complete, right?

[Anonymous No.16297469]

>>16297449
>by definition infinite, right?
*NOT infinite

[Anonymous No.16297519]

>>16297449
A breakpoint means it breaks out of the loop. There is no theoretical method of determining if the algorithm is truly infinite or if it halts, hence the halting problem.

[Anonymous No.16297570]

>>16297519
>There is no theoretical method of determining if the algorithm is truly infinite or if it halts
Thanks, that gave me something to think about.

[Anonymous No.16297602]

[Anonymous No.16297605]

>>16297570
>>16297519
>>16297449
>>16297385
>>16297313
>>16297295
>>16297254

Your samefagging is obvious and dull