/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.8461632]

Why does Satoshi hate BCH?

[Anonymous No.8461678]

Better than Lightning.

[Anonymous No.8461941]

>>8461678
>arguing with the man himself

[Anonymous No.8462208]

>>8461632
Two scenarios.
1 - He is/was part of Satoshi
2 - He's a salty cuck
But really who cares? Everyone got both BTC and BCH. One can fail and the other will go exponential. Both can coexist too.

[Anonymous No.8462229]

>>8462208
He and Finney are Satoshi

[Anonymous No.8462257]

>>8461632

[Anonymous No.8462288]

>>8461941
lightning literally is nu-banks. literally what satoshi wanted to destroy

[Anonymous No.8462319]

>>8462288
Yeah, but he (and Finney too) said repeatedly that Bitcoin is not meant to process your coffee purchase

[Anonymous No.8462364]

>>8462229
Yea I knew Finney was. I don't really know what role Szabo is trying to play right now. It could be smoke and mirrors with all this coordinated FUD.

[Anonymous No.8462407]

>>8462364
What do you mean? Szabo is also Satoshi. He did Bitgold, worked on Digicash, etc. He didn't even cite Bitgold lmao and then he post-dated his blog posts. He also asked for dev power few months before Bitcoin released

Finney argued for the same thing

[Anonymous No.8462419]

Bcash pisses me off because imagine btc price without bcash? Bitcoin would be 30k by now but Rogers coordinated spam "bitcoin cash is bitcoin" tricks new people.

[Anonymous No.8462526]

>>8462419
Yeah the way they try to force the name is pathetic

[Anonymous No.8462630]

[Anonymous No.8462828]

Stop calling nick satoshi, thanks

[Anonymous No.8463043]

>>8462828
People need to know

[Anonymous No.8463088]

>>8462419
If Bitcoin isn't strong enough to overcome little ol' Bitcoin Cash then which one is really the shitcoin?

[Anonymous No.8463362]

If someone could give one argument as to how increasing blocksize centralises bitcoin

Why does anyone even want lighting network when it is not a decentralised ledger? If its not on chain scaling its not a blockchain

[Anonymous No.8463409]

Bitcoin is like jew book and jew tube its being exposed as the scam it is and will be dropped like a hot potato when it happens

[Anonymous No.8463653]

>>8463362
>If someone could give one argument as to how increasing blocksize centralises bitcoin

Cause it increases the ledger size such that people can't host nodes if you encourage small transactions.

>Why does anyone even want lighting network when it is not a decentralised ledger? If its not on chain scaling its not a blockchain
Yeah, that's Satoshi's point. Blockchain is not meant for small coffee transactions. If you want this, you need LN or some other off-chain solution. Or even Bcash. But not the premium gloabal ledger

[Anonymous No.8463724]

>>8461632
fucking LINK morons are only pushing Nick being Satoshi because he follows chainlink on twitter now.

Nick is NOT Satoshi. Craig Wright + Hal Finney were.

[Anonymous No.8463730]

>>8462419

Why doesn't Bitcoin Core (BTC) change its name to Lightning?

[Anonymous No.8463765]

>>8463653
Non mining nodes dont do anything. The only argument people have for not increasing the blocksize is completely false

I dont think you read my second point

[Anonymous No.8463803]

Trolls are worried cause Dr Craig Wright is speaking at the Satoshi's Vision Conference in Tokyo this weekend so the are doing as much damage control early as they can. He is releasing some new info too so stay tuned.

[Anonymous No.8463825]

>>8463043
why? So that someone can kidnap or assassinate him?

Unmasking Satoshi benefits no one except criminals and government thugs.

[Anonymous No.8463835]

>>8462288
AHAHAHAHHAHA

[Anonymous No.8463865]

>>8463730
why doesnt bcash go to 0 where it belongs

[Anonymous No.8463871]

>>8463730
Trying to decide which group is more pathetic: Cashies of the Bitfinex'ed culties.

[Anonymous No.8463897]

>>8463835

Cashies on suicide watch

[Anonymous No.8463903]

>>8463835
>Obviously this emans we'll have to cripple layer one and make the entire network fee based while moving all transactions off chain where they can be censored by the very enitity i concieved bitcoin to challenge

kys cuck faggot

[Anonymous No.8463934]

>>8462419
>>8463653
Why do brainlets like you still have the courage to post anon?

[Anonymous No.8464069]

>>8463765
>Non mining nodes dont do anything.
They verify transactions, they protect your privacy by not having to connect to a remote node, they fulfil the purpose of decentralization cause you can join the network without havig to mine.

>I dont think you read my second point
Maybe you didn't understand what I said?

[Anonymous No.8464093]

>>8463825
So people know that Satoshi's vision is not Bcash and other copies

[Anonymous No.8464118]

>>8463835
>tfw Ripple is Satoshi's vision

[Anonymous No.8464129]

>>8464093
Anon, I-.....

[Anonymous No.8464139]

>>8463903
Just because LN exists doesn't mean you can't use the bitcoin blockchain..

[Anonymous No.8464164]

>>8463934
What's your point other than the fact that you have 0 reading comprehension?

[Anonymous No.8464184]

>>8464139
Let me pay $1000 USD to broadcast on the main chain, or let me pay .0001 USD to do the same thing plus more... really makes me think

[Anonymous No.8464193]

>>8464093
deferring to "Satoshi's vision" is just another form of centralization. It's an argument from authority.

[Anonymous No.8464201]

>>8464129
Yeah, he wants Bitcoin to be able to settle digital cash transactions... what's your point retard? That doesn't say anything about hosting all the world's transactions or not having off-chain solution

[Anonymous No.8464207]

Does this really sound like something Nick would have said? Satoshi was always in favor of big blocks and on-chain scaling...

[Anonymous No.8464216]

>>8463653
>The same arguments that have been debunked 100 times over

Yawn

[Anonymous No.8464231]

>>8463865
Good question. It's almost as if it has value for a reason. You don't stay in the top 5 marketcaps since inception by accident.

[Anonymous No.8464237]

>>8464164
>14 posts by this ID
>being this mad
Anon, check the highlighted version
>>8464129
And then get off the comptuer you're getting steamed up. You need a few hours, possibly a few weeks, to overcome this brainlet shame you're experiencing on an anonymous vietnamese basket weaving forum.

I feel bad for you anon.

[Anonymous No.8464254]

>>8464184
You use the main chain when you need it. Finney even said it'll just be used between banks. Clearly their vision is beyond your understanding cause you just want to buy your coffee

[Anonymous No.8464268]

>>8464193
Bcash are the ones that claim they fulfill Satoshi's vision, and this clarifies that they're not correct and shouldn't put words into his mouth. Learn to read

[Anonymous No.8464300]

>>8464216
They were never debunked

[Anonymous No.8464305]

Redpilling with more Satoshi quotes

[Anonymous No.8464313]

>>8464237
>still retarded
Can't help you

[Anonymous No.8464329]

>>8464207
No of course not. Nick is not Satoshi. He never really agreed with Satoshi's vision.

And man I can't wait for the conference.

[Anonymous No.8464354]

>>8464329
That's a made up quote brainlet. Nick is Satoshi

[Anonymous No.8464374]

>>8464268
>Learn to read
lol, you first brainlet. It doesn't matter whether you think Satoshi would support BTC or BCH. Either way, the argument is "the only true Bitcoin is the one that Satoshi would support." Which is an argument from authority. The whole purpose of decentralization is to remove authority from the picture. In other words, each cryptocurrency must be judged by its merits -- not by whether some highly-regarded person gives it his blessing.

[Anonymous No.8464405]

>>8464374
Stop being retarded. I didn't say Satoshi was right or that we have to do what Satoshi wants. I said that Bcash doesn't fulfill Satoshi's vision and they should stop scamming people believing so. They're the ones making an argument form authority.

[Anonymous No.8464418]

>>8463653
This coffee argument is such an abomination. Its the most arrogant sentiment. Your coffee payment is someone else's fucking monthly salary. Bitcoin was meant to handle ALL THE WORLD'S transactions on chain.

Thinking Bitcoin on-chain is only meant for transactions in the thousands-millions of dollars makes you worse than any banker. This way of thinking is a cancer.

[Anonymous No.8464441]

>>8464354
Nick is absolutely...100%...not Satoshi.

[Anonymous No.8464460]

>>8464305

[Anonymous No.8464473]

>>8464405
Anon I hate doing this to you. Please stop so we don't have to feel the second order embarrassment for you.

[Anonymous No.8464478]

>>8464418
>Bitcoin was meant to handle ALL THE WORLD'S transactions on chain.
No it wasn't? Where the fuck do you get this?

[Anonymous No.8464492]

>>8464473
>still can't read
You're just hopeless anon. Nowhere in there it says it needs to accept all transactions in the world when you get your coffee from Starbucks. Fuck off

[Anonymous No.8464561]

>Both Satoshi boys advocating for off chain solutions

Do you want to know the truth though? They didn't want to increase the block size because it's a retarded solution. It only postpones congestion and basically doesn't solve anything. It's something simple for retards like Anderson and Ver to comprehend, but not something that solves the core problem to Satoshi's vision. They rejected it because they wanted to force thinking about more scalable solution and a different mentality. It's not about having all transactions in the world in a public ledger, it's about enabling secure transactions without the need of a financial instiution.

And I don't have to agree with them. I don't have any Bitcoin. I'm all in Monero despite Nick advocating for Zcash (he's friends with Miller). I don't agree with Satoshi's vision, but I respect it and I respect both Nick and Finney.

[Anonymous No.8464562]

People should tune into the conference coming up soon if they want to learn. There are lots of misconceptions about how bitcoin works that are going to be cleared up. It is not what most people think.

[Anonymous No.8464625]

>>8464561
It's obvious that 1 MB is far too low of a limit. At the present you could go buy a $4,000 desktop that can run process 1GB blocks without falling behind. At that point you are at visa levels.
Yes, I agree it is "kicking the can down the road" but holy hell can we punt the thing.

[Anonymous No.8464627]

This anon with 20+ posts in this thread should just neck himself, brainlets like him cant be helped

[Anonymous No.8464724]

>>8464627
Kys

[Anonymous No.8464727]

>>8461632
craig has always hated szabo, thats why he wasnt mentioned. dyor you dumb niggers. szabo is a brainlet poser incapable of creating bitcoin, proof? bitgold

[Anonymous No.8464872]

>>8464069
A non mining node has no ability to do work it cannot do any of the things you listed

[Anonymous No.8464886]

>>8464562

A few hints...

- Bitcoin is secured by economics more than cryptography. If you fail to understand incentives you fail to understand Bitcoin.

- 2nd layers, sidechains, altcoins etc. These are not necessary and fragment the security model. The network is designed the way it is for a very good reason.

- We are moving faster than Moore's law. Not at. Faster. Having the hardware to do this will be no issue.

More to come.

[Anonymous No.8464899]

the desperation of core cucks in this thread is palpable

[Anonymous No.8464960]

>>8464724
>>8461632
>>8461941
>>8462229
>>8462319
>>8462407
>>8462526
>>8462630
>>8463043
>>8463653
>>8464069
>>8464093
>>8464118
>>8464139
>>8464164
>>8464201
>>8464254
>>8464268
>>8464300
>>8464313
>>8464354
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SJm2ep3X_M

[Anonymous No.8464996]

Daily reminder that corekeks are the male feminists of crypto

[Anonymous No.8465198]

BCH versus BTC

[Anonymous No.8465233]

at least i can buy things with BCH

[Anonymous No.8465273]

if only mining nodes should exist according to cashies we would have like 20 nodes in total by now.
decentralization and censorship resistance is way more important than the cash part.

[Anonymous No.8465310]

>>8463653
>Yeah, that's Satoshi's point. Blockchain is not meant for small coffee transactions.

Bitcoin white paper name 'Peer to Peer Digital Cash'
If he doesn't think Bitcoin should be used as cash, he's not Satoshi.

[Anonymous No.8465324]

>>8464872
>I have no idea how the protocol works
Good to know?

[Anonymous No.8465326]

Only a matter of time before BTC is slowly replaced as a base pair.

[Anonymous No.8465341]

>>8465273
If you had 1000000000000 non mining nodes and 1 mining node the mining node would have full control over the protocol. Non mining nodes do nothing to secure or decentralise the network

[Anonymous No.8465346]

>>8464996
Jesus Christ cashie meme skills are even sub leftwing/sjw tier. Absolutely embarrassing excuse for a coin.

[Anonymous No.8465374]

>>8464069
You only verify transactions by mining a block. Non-mining nodes by definition don't verify shit. At best, its just a listener.

[Anonymous No.8465376]

>>8465341
When every else uses their CPUs to ignore your garbage blocks that is more powerful than any amount of mining.

https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/78q0mw/bitcoinsegwit2x_septemberoctober_segwit2x_status/doxazyt/

[Anonymous No.8465406]

You can't even use bitcoin to go to a bitcoin conference ffs. How do you explain dat????

[Anonymous No.8465437]

>>8465374
I guess this is your first day reading about blockchain? Start here https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Full_node#Why_should_you_run_a_full_node

[Anonymous No.8465448]

>>8465346

[Anonymous No.8465519]

Therefore, it is critical for Bitcoin's survival that the great majority of the Bitcoin economy be backed by full nodes, not lightweight nodes. This is especially important for Bitcoin businesses, which have more economic weight. To contribute to Bitcoin's economic strength, you must actually use a full node for your real transactions (or use a lightweight node connected to a full node that you personally control). Just running a full node on a server somewhere does not contribute to Bitcoin's economic strength.


Deluded Cashies BTFO

[Anonymous No.8465523]

>>8465376
Non mining nodes have no hashpower ignoring the chain you dont like doesnt mean your chain will have hashpower.

[Anonymous No.8465527]

>>8464886

You have my attention... could you speak more about incentives please? I've been thinking about this idea a lot

[Anonymous No.8465555]

>>8465523
As explained previously, full nodes enforce the consensus rules no matter what. However, lightweight nodes do not do this. Lightweight nodes do whatever the majority of mining power says. Therefore, if most of the miners got together to increase their block reward, for example, lightweight nodes would blindly go along with it. If this ever happened, the network would split such that lightweight nodes and full nodes would end up on separate networks, using separate currencies. People using lightweight nodes would be unable to transact with people using full nodes

[Anonymous No.8465581]

>>8465437
You just linked an argument against yourself
>As explained previously, full nodes enforce the consensus rules no matter what. However, lightweight nodes do not do this. Lightweight nodes do whatever the majority of mining power says.

There is no action you can take with a non mining node that will impact what miners want to mine

[Anonymous No.8465595]

>>8465437
> muh, link which claims non-mining node enforces consensus rules

If this isn't your first day reading about blockchain and you believe that shit, you're retarded.

[Anonymous No.8465638]

>>8462288
>nu-banks

Translation: I watched that one video made by that retarded guy and now I know everything.

[Anonymous No.8465666]

>>8465519
>bitcoin businesses
They all switched to BCH though. How do you run a business when transactions might cost $10 the next day, and your only option is to use beta software which can lose your money and needs 100% availability.
Businesses do benefit from running full nodes (only cause of 0-conf, no consensus rules fake news), which is why BCH will have more full nodes by 2020 (if the BTC chain is even alive by then with its poor DAA).

[Anonymous No.8465720]

>>8464886
B-BUT MY SECOND LAYER LIGHTNING N-NETWORK

[Anonymous No.8465772]

>>8465666
fucking kek.

Your scamcoin will fail in the same way of Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin XT and all the other crap.

Also 54% of reachable Bitcoin ABC (bcash) nodes are running on Hangzhou Alibaba virtual servers in China. Compare that to 2% of reachable Bitcoin nodes running on Hangzhou Alibaba servers.

[Anonymous No.8465779]

btc merchant adoption is shrinking bch adoption is growing.
Btc's replace by fee makes 0 confirmation transactions 100% unsafe and means settlement cannot be said to happen within 10 minutes.
There is not a single reason to cap blocks at 1mb today (non mining nodes do nothing).
Segwit destroys the mining nash equilibrium incentivising the collusion of miners to change the UTXO without owners signatures. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VoFb3mcxluY You can only trust jihan and roger to not be doing this right now.
BTC is vulnerable to a chain death spiral BCH is not.
Why introduce segwit before a blocksize increase when lightning network requires 133mb as specified in the lightning network whitepaper?
Why introduce segwit at all when it is not necessary for second layer solutions?
Lightning network will not be decentralized because to make decentralised routing in a mesh network is NP hard.
Why would anyone want lightning network when it is not a decentralised ledger? the whole point of bitcoin is to scale on chain as that is what makes decentralised uncensorable money which can free all the people in the world from the financial repression of central banks.

[Anonymous No.8465793]

>>8465595
>>8465581
Maybe this will help you but I doubt it https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_is_not_ruled_by_miners

[Anonymous No.8465835]

>>8465772
>reddit spacing
>pajeet-tier nonsensical arguments about web host choices
Apart from ABC, we also have XT, Unlimited, Counterparty cash and nChain working on the protocol. This is decentralization.
Keep bragging that your commie dictators at core with their single implementation have put thousands of fake nodes on aws as if it matters at all.

[Anonymous No.8465930]

>>8465793
If you honestly think non mining node signaling would make miners act against their economic interest you're delusional. The irony of linking that tweet when core is completely in control of btc and are a group of programmers making economic decisions. Case in point core thinking a currency that is slow, expensive and insecure will beat one that is fast, cheap to send and more secure.

[Anonymous No.8466082]

>>8465835
>Apart from ABC, we also have XT, Unlimited, Counterparty cash and nChain working on the protocol. This is decentralization.

All those projects failed spectacularly over serious bugs due incompetent developers. What makes you think this time will be different?
Segwit2x failed by a rookie programming error also

The only new thing that Bcash did was the EDA and that shit failed too. How long after the Bcash hardfork it has to fork again due the broken EDA? Like 2 months? Btrash is a fucking joke

[Anonymous No.8466176]

>BCH has the keys, regardless
>Satoshi Vision conference - team BCH will move coins from Satoshi's wallet and show the world
>It will be claimed Satoshi supports BCH
>FOMO
>Miners switch
>Further news is released that BCH will have every capability of any alt coin, smart contacts, privacy, 32mb, colored coins, even gay ass LN

[Anonymous No.8466202]

>>8466082
Theyre not projects theyre developers.
Segwit2x didnt fork because miners withdrew support
What specifically is wrong with eda?

[Anonymous No.8466258]

>>8461632
>Why does Satoshi hate BCH?

This is a really good question. You have Nick Szabo, one of the smartest people you could ever listen to, who was clearly heavily involved in the concept of Bitcoin versus "Dr" Fake PhD Craig Wright who is clearly dumb as fuck.

If you listen to either of these people for 5 minutes you can tell that one is genius tier and the other is a complete moron.

Obvious the sock puppet is Roger Ver with his propaganda machine and complete lack of scruples.

[Anonymous No.8466282]

>>8463088
>If Bitcoin isn't strong enough to overcome little ol' Bitcoin Cash

then all coins are shitcoins and it's all a scam, which is possible.

[Anonymous No.8466285]

>>8466202
>Debating pajeets/bots.

Stop debating these shame-ridden retards. Just post pro bch infographics at this point. Anyone still reading this far down this thread with any sense is already pro-bch.

[Anonymous No.8466331]

>>8466176
>>It will be claimed Satoshi supports BCH

This would be hilarious because literally every coin would go sub-$1 immediately if the original BTC coins ever move. It's still possible for it to happen, but it would be the biggest troll move, shit show ever, so I doubt it happens.

[Anonymous No.8466353]

>>8465793

Bitcoin is controlled by an economic feedback loop of which miners are an important part. (Along with users, merchants, and others) While miners do not have total control, they play a major role in enforcing the rules. Non-mining nodes by contrast do absolutely nothing. You could crank up 1,000 nodes that changed the rules and it would have 0 impact on what gets put into a block. You would need economic support (merchant adoption, user adoption, exchange adoption, people to agree these new rules represented "Bitcoin") of a massive magnitude, which would only happen with miners moving to the new consensus rules anyway as they are incentivized to mine only what will net them profit. This idea that non-mining nodes are some form of "voting" or whatever is totally false. Bitcoin is not 1 vote per IP address, it is 1 vote per CPU. This whole full node thing is the fallacy that caused people to buy into the idea that the block size had to stay ridiculously low so everyone would run a raspberry pi node. It is wrong.

[Anonymous No.8466359]

>>8465930
>If you honestly think non mining node signaling would make miners act against their economic interest you're delusional.
Their economic interest is to follow consensus established by the nodes. If miners were to go rogue and build an invalid chain, all full nodes will reject it. You can have the longest chain, but as long as you don't have the longest *valid* chain, the network is free to ignore you. Your coinbase transactions will go to waste, and merchants running their own node won't accept your fork. Everyone with a node is free to accept the chain that is valid

>Case in point core thinking a currency that is slow, expensive and insecure will beat one that is fast, cheap to send and more secure.
How is Bcash more secure again?

[Anonymous No.8466395]

>>8466331
>literally every coin would go sub-$1 immediately if the original BTC coins ever move.
No they wouldn't

[Anonymous No.8466413]

>>8466359
>How is Bcash more secure again?

Cashies unironically believe this. Right now Bcash can be 51% attacked with no problems.
Nobody does this because is expensive and no one gives a shit about Bcash

[Anonymous No.8466443]

>>8466353
The point is that it embodies decentralization. Everyone is free to run their nodes and validate transactions themselves, while ignoring malicious players. Without these nodes, decentralization wouldn't exist. It's not voting, it's deciding for yourself whether the chain is valid. Anyway, I guess you need some brain power to understand abstract concepts like decentralisation and governance

[Anonymous No.8466461]

>If Bitmain doesn't like another coin, it's dead (Monero)
>BCH is the golden child
>Over 10,000 mining companies exist
>A little over 100k ASIC miners exist all trying to get the next BCH coin
>Billions are being spent to find the next BCH
>Why spend that much in resources unless you know massive profits will be gained
>Miners don't give a fuck about collecting fees as their main revenue

[Anonymous No.8466493]

>>8466461
Monero is changing the PoW next month...

[Anonymous No.8466498]

>>8466359
Their economic interest is to make money. Non mining Nodes have zero ability to impact consensus because they have no ability to do work.

Bitcoin cash is more secure because it has no replace by fee, no segwit and is not vulnerable to chain death spiral

>>8466413
If no one cared about bch that would be a reason to 51% attack it. Its kind of hard to see why you would buy btc when the majority of the miners (who actually secure the network) are openly telling you they see bch as bitcoin.

[Anonymous No.8466526]

>>8466443
It embodies delusion in that you think running a mining node will do anything to change what miners want to mine when there is no mechanism for a non mining node to do so

[Anonymous No.8466536]

>>8466498
>Their economic interest is to make money.
Yeah so why don't they make some money by mining and confirming some double-spending?

>Non mining Nodes have zero ability to impact consensus because they have no ability to do work.
They can reject the chain. If all merchants and payment processors running non-mining nodes reject your chain, your mined bitcoins are useless. Miners have no choice but going back and confirming valid nodes that full nodes can accept. I don't know how else to phrase this for you

[Anonymous No.8466538]

>>8466443
>you need some brain power to understand abstract concepts like decentralisation and governance

Interesting why people would be questioning the need to maintain decentralization considering what is happening at Facebook right now.

Centralization is short-term good, long-term terrifying.

[Anonymous No.8466557]

>>8466526
Miners mining non-valid nodes is worthless if all full nodes reject them. They can exchange bitcoins between themselves, but the rest of the community will ignore all their work

[Anonymous No.8466625]

>>8466359
>>8466359
Finally anon asks a decent question.
BCH is no more secure than BTC until segwit is added. There are bad outcomes for segwit in the mining game as explained here:

https://youtu.be/VoFb3mcxluY?t=17m

[Anonymous No.8466655]

>>8466536
>>8466536
Because there is more money to be made mining coins, securing the network and allowing adoption than destroying the thing you own more of than anyone else

Rejecting what miners choose as the longest chain doesnt affect the miners it affects you. If you want to run a node on a chain with no hashpower good for you, it doesnt do anything to stop miners.

Saying a non mining node can affect consensus is like saying someone watching a tennis match on tv can change the outcome of the match. Sure you can change the channel if you dont like the way its going but it doesnt change the outcome

[Anonymous No.8466687]

>>8463724
>Craig Wright is satoshi
lol no

Version of the page in 2015:

> Once in a while even I have a break from study and writing.

> Tomorrow - back to the DNS paper, my statistics dissertation and work. I have a cryptocurrency paper out soon. Twenty years. Triple entry book keeping. BDO was good for something.

> Tomorrow, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Which piece, well that is still undecided.

https://web.archive.org/web/20151003011022/http://gse-compliance.blogspot.com.au/2008_08_24_archive.html

Version of the page in 2014:

> Once in a while even I have a break from study and writing.

> Tomorrow - back to the DNS paper, my statistics dissertation and work.

> Tomorrow, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Which piece, well that is still undecided.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140602022658/http://gse-compliance.blogspot.com.au/2008_08_24_archive.html

Craig Wright is a gigantic fraud.

[Anonymous No.8466696]

>>8461632
because it is a scam

[Anonymous No.8466715]

>>8461632

“Not to mention the fact that in terms of any governing body trying to distinguish between legitimate tech and true scams, Bcash does not clearly distinguish itself as a 'scam' while leaving Bitcoin legit. Both Bitcoin and Bcash are susceptible to influence by bad actors with enough capital to create a wake. So while assumptions being made about the motivations of actors like Roger Ver might be correct, if you seek to have the government recognize a forked chain of Bitcoin as a scam, how do you anticipate they are going to evaluate the parent technology from which Bcash forked?

The point is there is nothing inherent to Bcash protocol that makes it a ‘scam’ while Bitcoin is not.”
>t.redditor

[Anonymous No.8466724]

>>8466655
>>Rejecting what miners choose as the longest chain doesnt affect the miners it affects you.
Are you daft? Miners can mindlessly mine an invalid chain as long as they want, but their block rewards are useless if their blocks are not validated by full nodes that they want to financially interact with.

Let me give you an example.

Merchant A runs a full node to make sure the network is honest
90% of miners start making invalid transactions on their chain
Merchant A takes a look at that chain, and decides to ignore all coins on that chain
Now miners want to use merchant A and send him coins minted from their chain
Merchant A looks at the coins and realises they're invalid according to his view of the network, so the transaction is seen as invalid

Now imagine all merchants do this. And imagine that the rest of the 10% miners do actually perform honest work. Now all the work that went into the other chain is worthless cause no one accepts it. Miners did work for nothing.

You probably still don't get it but that's what decentralisation means in Satoshi's vision

[Anonymous No.8466726]

brainlets think this bottleneck is good for a cryptocurrency.

[Anonymous No.8466752]

>>8464254
buying coffee is the most retarded argument of the cashies. I don't need Bitcoin to buy coffee, I need it to protect me from government tyranny.

Visa works fine for coffee and toilet paper, there's like 0 demand of replacing it.

[Anonymous No.8466760]

>>8466724
>Thinks Merchants give bitcoin value
>Still thinks btc has value
Anon how do you even get this retarded. At first I thought you were false flagging to make cashies look good by comparison. But now I think you just like being picked on.

[Anonymous No.8466762]

>>8466726
>brainlet who doesn't understand the point of bitcoin

[Anonymous No.8466802]

>>8466760
Merchant is an example that you retards may be able to understand, but you're clearly all braindead. Point is, any other party that the miners want to interact with are free to reject their transactions as long as they run a full node and according to their node the transaction is invalid. You're all dumb as fuck and just want a coin that scales lmao go buy some Nano or something

[Anonymous No.8466803]

>>8466724
Yes a miner will invest millions of dollars to then invalidate the system he is heavily invested in. This situation is the equivalent of a miner shooting himself in the foot. It would never happen

The only chain it could happen on is btc because the majority of hash rate has publicly said they dont think btc is bitcoin so they could feasibly act in a way that invalidates the btc chain so that they could gain more bch.

You keep saying full node but i dont think you understand that a non mining node has no ability to validate it is the equivalent of a window to the blockchain

[Anonymous No.8466825]

>>8466803
Validate != mine on top of the block

Can't believe you still don't get it

[Anonymous No.8466843]

>>8466802
>>8466762
Anything else to add?

[Anonymous No.8466872]

>>8466843
Nope, did all the steps in the pyramid one by one, I think I'm done. Oh forgot the last step: ks

[Anonymous No.8466916]

>>8463835
He's right about scaling, whatever people think of the proposed solutions. It's LN or alts. Cash doesn't even attempt to solve the scaling issue, and 8MB blocks are still not nearly enough to handle "buy a coffee" type transactions under mass adoption.
The peer to peer functions are exciting but Bitcoin got the details so terribly wrong I do wonder if it was ever intended to be seriously used as currency.

[Anonymous No.8466932]

>>8466726
>November
Why don't you post a more recent chart you fucking dishonest cashie retard

[Anonymous No.8466951]

>>8466803
>non mining node has no ability to validate

[Anonymous No.8466958]

>>8466916
Could use gigabyte blocks and then put lightning on top of that.

[Anonymous No.8466963]

>>8466916
Yeah, but not as a general-purpose day-to-day currency. It's meant to be used as a secure decentralized currency for people who need to avoid censorship, not for dumb 4chan autists who want to feel like hackers and redditors who want to pay Twitch streamers with Bitcoin

Same with Monero. It doesn't scale because it's not mean to be a general currency. It's an untraceable, unlinkable, anonymous currency for cases that require it

[Anonymous No.8466972]

does everyone see how heated the two sides are? it is no doubt that BCH holds significant weight in the cryptosphere and will be an interesting journey

[Anonymous No.8466978]

>>8462419
Can you name one real life person who has been tricked? This is an imaginary problem

[Anonymous No.8467025]

>>8466978
Regardless, they do everything they can to hold to the Bitcoin name. They even changed Wikipedia to remove references to "Bcash" despite being listed as Bcash on some exchanges. They're absolutely desperate, they misrepresent Satoshi's ideology, and they have a very superficial understanding of decentralization because they're all either brainlets or scammers who want to cash out as much as possible.

[Anonymous No.8467070]

>>8466951
OK Brainlet, a block is mined which you and your node don't think meet the consensus rules, but all the mining hash power does. What happens?
What does your super powerful non-contributory node do? - Here's a clue, fuck all. Your own your own.

[Anonymous No.8467132]

>>8467070
You won't accept those bitcoins as valid in any transaction. If all nodes do the same, then all mined bitcoins are invalid, and the miners have to go back to respect the rules or waste all their money. The miners respect the consensus of the nodes, nothing else

[Anonymous No.8467246]

>>8467132
If there zero non mining nodes in this situation it would still cause a hard fork because the miners would fork to a chain without the fradulent transactions because the old chains coins are worthless. They dont switch because redditors' non mining nodes are disagreeing with the fradulent chain they switch because there is no money to be made in mining coins from a fradulent chain. The non mining nodes do nothing.

[Anonymous No.8467370]

>>8467246
They're worthless PRECISELY BECAUSE the other full nodes don't accept them. If full nodes accepted fraudulent transactions, then they would be valid and worthwhile.

[Anonymous No.8467436]

>>8467370
No theyre worthless because people will not buy a currency that is not trustworthy.

[Anonymous No.8467474]

>>8467370
You dont need a non mining node to broadcast a transaction. There is not a fradulent situation that would turn out differently if the system had non mining nodes or none because non mining nodes do nothing but allow people to observe blockchains

[Anonymous No.8467554]

>>8467132

Non-mining nodes don't validate transactions dipshit

[Anonymous No.8467566]

>>8467436
And that's what full nodes enable you to do: you can decide what's valid and trustworthy and only accept that regardless of whether you mine or not, and reject any other chain.

[Anonymous No.8467604]

>>8467474
>>8467554
Learn what validate blocks mean before talking about abstract concepts that are beyond your understanding. Makes sense you're a Cashie gotta go sleep enjoy your 8mb scalable coin

[Anonymous No.8467609]

>>8467566
No you cant only the miners can

There is no situation where having non mining nodes or none would change the outcome of the situation because they are not the mechanism for consensus; proof of work is

[Anonymous No.8467630]

>>8467604

Only miners contribute to the network. if 1 miner decides your coins are to be double spent, they are to be doublespent. Your node can't do shit

[Anonymous No.8467633]

>>8467609
2deep4u brainlet

[Anonymous No.8467634]

>>8461632
Szabo is certainly not Satoshi. Satoshi used English idioms and slang, so he's either from the UK or Australia.

[Anonymous No.8467648]

>>8467633
Sophistry or ad hominem is all you have

[Anonymous No.8467663]

I can't wait for lightning to fall apart

[Anonymous No.8467691]

>>8467634
szabo is a fucking genius. you think he's not smart enough to be able to "fake" his writing style to throw people off?

[Anonymous No.8467738]

>>8467634
Szabo is American and was educated in America and they already analysed his writing https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/likeinamirror.wordpress.com/2013/12/01/satoshi-nakamoto-is-probably-nick-szabo/amp/ Finney and Szabo are satoshi

[Anonymous No.8467764]

>>8467738
misread what you said about English idioms cause I'm half asleep but still. same writing on his blog

[Anonymous No.8467828]

>>8467738
yup, i think so too.

Man, can't wait for the coming out party for if/when Szabo decides to reveal himself!!!

[Anonymous No.8467831]

>>8467691
he went george washington university. genius? i think not

[Anonymous No.8467862]

>>8467828
If you understood anything about what he stands for, he'll obviously never say anything. That'd be selling out, and people who are supposed to know already know who he is. Satoshi is anonymous as part of the decentralised governance of bitcoin, and you can barely find anything at all about Nick

[Anonymous No.8467894]

>>8467831
>falling for the centralisation of American "elite" education
you're clearly still a brainlet

[Anonymous No.8467901]

>>8462407
lol yes and those projects failed.
he couldn't figure the economics out.

[Anonymous No.8467915]

>>8467894
also "roasbeef" ln co-creator is a nigger

[Anonymous No.8467916]

>>8461632
Because btrash is centralized

[Anonymous No.8467922]

also Finney was getting harassed and threats so you obviously don't want to say you're satoshi. also vitalik said on Reddit too that SN = NS

[Anonymous No.8467961]

>>8467916
No one is preventing you from mining blocks or running nodes.

[Anonymous No.8467965]

>>8467862
His wikipedia page is pretty much not that informative compared to Hal and Craig. Bitcoin is still a SHA256 coin. NSA made it. Thoughts on that?

[Anonymous No.8467980]

>>8467922
So there's about as much evidence that szabo is satoshi as there is wright is satoshi https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pNZyRMG2CjA

[Anonymous No.8467997]

>>8467965
Szabo is a secretive guy and NSA are too brainlets

[Anonymous No.8468040]

>>8461632
I don't get why we need LN or BCH for the same reasoning

If it's "Digital Gold", and you want to buy a coffee with Gold, what is wrong with exchanging to DOGE or something at the moment of purchase?

At least LN is contained to BTC itself somehow, basically acting like a super-high liquidity, decentralized Gold Bank

And this is fine because it's not really a "bank" like the ones crypto is attempting to subvert because it doesn't loan BTC at interest or use a fractional reserve.

BCH solved a problem that didn't exist, and LN actually brings some utility to the coin that's been agreed upon thus far as the Digital Gold, but there was never any technical problem with switching to an altcoin at the point of sale, it's functionally identical to LN as far as anyone buying their coffee is concerned.

[Anonymous No.8468083]

>>8467980
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/05/17/business/decoding-the-enigma-of-satoshi-nakamoto-and-the-birth-of-bitcoin.html

or that video where he says "when I was developing bitco... I mean bitgold"

basically if you haven't figured out out yet then you're not meant to know

[Anonymous No.8468298]

Just a few day before we all find out which coin Satoshi supports!

[Anonymous No.8468970]

>>8468040
>Problem that doesn't exist
Anon, fees are a problem for people who intend to use bitcoin. If you're going to have merchants accepting bitcoin, as is suggested in >>8466724 then you need fees low enough that it's feasible to use it.

[Anonymous No.8469554]

>>8468040
>BCH solved a problem that didn't exist
>LN can only open 150k channels per day
>birth rate is 360k per day
>you'd need twice the block size to cater for just opening one channel your entire life

[Anonymous No.8469905]

>>8468298
Gee, I wonder.

Fake Satoshi - Check
Roger Ver's Bitcoin.com - Check
Bitmain - Check

I am going out on a limb here and saying Btrashie?

[Anonymous No.8470000]

>It will be claimed Satoshi supports BCH
>FOMO
>Miners switch
>Further news is released that BCH will have every capability of any alt coin, smart contacts, privacy, 32mb, colored coins, even gay ass LN

[Anonymous No.8470046]

>>8470000
quads of truth

[Anonymous No.8470050]

>>8470000
DIGITS

[Anonymous No.8470593]

Blockstream offices working overtime to contain the damage

[Anonymous No.8470629]

>>8462229
Nick Szabo + Sergey Nazarov = Satoshi Nakamoto. Hal Finney was the first to start working with [[[Him]]].

[Anonymous No.8470643]

>>8464473
Go back to the white paper. Now copy and paste the conclusion here.

[Anonymous No.8470693]

Pot calling the kettle black.

[Anonymous No.8470794]

>>8466285

[Anonymous No.8471106]

>>8464492
It literally says that, as second-layer solutions require an intermediary.

[Anonymous No.8471398]

Nothing excites me about Bitcoin. Bitcoin Cash, otoh, is still as exciting to me as the day I read the whitepaper. Why not try on-chain scaling? Pro-tip: it works.

[Anonymous No.8471467]

>>8462419
The attack had to happen. be glad it's as pathetic as it is and not more sophisticated.

[Anonymous No.8471728]

>>8461632
Littleraly just bought some ncash to use in a transaction and some Btc.. Btc won by 20min fuck bcash