2022-11: Warosu is now out of maintenance. Become a Patron!
>it's not a bribe if I do it publiclyRoger and bcashers are literally retarded.https://twitter.com/rogerkver/status/998457574478438400
I think there's a good chance he kills himself or goes into a mental hospital within a year or two.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39KpscRXyXY
BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH
>>9540571lol what the fuck
imagine being shorter than a chink
We need bcash to keep the lunatic bcore fags in check, believe it or not. Nobody cared about improving bcore until bcashies made a better product with some simple edits.Roger can bankrupt himself for all I care but competition is good.
>when you buy a financial asset whose biggest holders are publicly announcing their intention to dump it
>>9541891btc is now a scam for miners to accumulate more bch
>>9541849low iq noob detected.if it weren't for miners, lightning would have been widely adopted by now, they stalled segwit for 2 years.
He is fighting hard. I have respect for that. He is dip-shit crazy and a fanatic retard for sure on the other hand.I love this resulting drama. Own bitcoin and a little bit of bcash too. Just because he fights that hard.
>>9541849roger will never hold more of his net wealth in bcash he will hold bitcoin until he dies
This kike needs to be stopped.
>>9541820>cashies still think the flippening will happenKEK
>>9541925Who knows. There's so much shilling in the bitfag arena I can't tell anymore.I never paid much for bitcoin fees though. Funny enough I always used the viabtc accelerator which was... made possible by cashfags.
>>9541891https://mobile.twitter.com/officialmcafee/status/932479180394172416?lang=deJihan never sold a single coin
>>9541925if core had increased the blocksize years ago we would have had a peer to peer global electronic cash that can free people from currency debasement which lightning network can never do as explained here >>9542022>>9542123>>9542105but he intends to.
>>9542022Bullish on NANO as well.
>>9540571roger ver taking a huge dump on your face
>send 5 bucks to a man making 6 figures to demonstrate technology>HURR it's a bribe>demonstrate there's a market by buying significant stock>DURR he's bribing in publicjesus christbcash is trash, but corecucks are such absolute mongs it makes you want to support it just to spite them
>>9542147not interested in reading a long rant by a nocoiner (jorge stofli) who thinks all crypto is bad and will fail. If you have an argument, lay it here.Potential demand for bitcoin is unlimited, we need to process trillions of transactions per second, not 10, 20 or even 100. Increasing blocksize increases centralization without solving scalability. It's kicking the can down the road at a high cost. Bitcoin is useless if it becomes centralized where only miners and datac enters get to store and verify blocks. Roger doesn't care about Satoshi's vision, he just cares about himself.
>>9542244by the way, the blocksize will be increased, but gradually and moderately to preserve decentralization, and it will be bundled with important optimizations that requires a hardfork.
>>9541975>>9542022>>9542123oh look, here's the paid bch shill/bagholder ready to spam the thread to death with his shill folder
>>9542244what specific blocksize do you think is a problem?keeping in the mind global adoption on lightning will require 133mb which would allow for around 1000 trx/sec on chainnon mining nodes have zero ability to affect what the miners want to do
>>9542299Have you heard of streaming money? Getting paid by the second? Watching video streams and pay every second instead of paying 30 bucks for a subscription every month? This would create 1000 Petabyte chains. It's impossible on bch. But it's the future. BCH has no future.
>>9542299>non mining nodes have zero ability to affect what the miners want to donot sure if a retarded noob or a retarded shill. mined blocks are worthless if full nodes don't accept them (i.e. if they don't follow the rules). segwit2x was canceled exactly because of that. pic related. >what specific blocksize do you think is a problem?bcashers want huge blocks (> 1 gigabyte), so huge that only data centers can handle them and users would have to trust the miners to follow the rules instead of running a full node.
>>9542393I don't think big blocks are evil, I don't think Ripple is bad, they just trade decentralization for performance, if you like that, it's ok, just don't try to push that shit on bitcoin, decentralization is its most important property, if it loses it, it becomes worthless.
>>9542393pic related #2
>>9542432>the simple fact is that if they didn't run those nodes, this whole discussion would not existin other words, bitcoin would be forked every 2 days like bcash.worth noting:1- 20% of nodes were forked off in last bcash hard fork. 2- bcash development is very centralized. even a hardcore supporter and developer complained.
>>9542448more about bcash centralization.
>>9542432this letter is hilarious>youre not helping decentralization by running a non-mining node>if it werent for you, i could do whatever the fuck i want with the protocolthis subverting kike is just begging for a bullet.
>>9542470lol yeah. Save it please and share it when necessary. People have short memories.
>>9542480nah, thanks. i think core are a bunch of retarded technocrats who are detached from real world, just a notch better than the shitshow that is bch.imo they shouldve increased the blocksize slightly in a hardfork and implement other changes requiring hard fork (better malleability fix than segwit for example). hardforks are a necessary part of any oss development, but core are too pussy to do them for some reason.i wont spread their propaganda until core grows some balls to do whats necessary.
>>9542544>imo they shouldve increased the blocksize slightly in a hardfork and implement other changes requiring hard fork (better malleability fix than segwit for example).they will do that eventually, wasting a hardfork on just a block increase would have been stupid. There are many optimizations and improvements that are being developed that will require a hardfork. >hardforks are a necessary part of any oss developmentthat's where you are wrong, bitcoin isn't just a software project, it's money, and it's valuable because devs can't change it whenever they want like an android app. an old bitcoin client can still sync to the network, hardforking reduces bitcoin's value. btw, segwit was ready long time before the fees became this high. the miners stalled segwit for about 2 years. segwit is not just a bug fix, it's a blocksize increase.
>>9542292>facts are shillingKys, corecuck.
>>9542611read the intro of the whitepaper, retarded shill. Satoshi didn't just want low fees, he wanted to create trustless system. The big blocks model relies on trust. Satoshi's picked the date of gold confiscation on US as his birthday, he also left us this message in the genesis block:"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"his goal is fucking central banks and fiat, no to create an inefficient version of paypal for retards like you. small blocks = better for decentralization lightning = scalability and low feesbcash = centralizated and doesn't scale. lightning will handle billions or trillions of transactions per second, it will be used for micro streamed payments, while bcash will only be used by retarded shills like you to tip each other in twitter.
>>9542587i disagree that hardforks would reduce btcs value (well it might do so, but very slightly). i actually prefer the way xmr and some other oss' do it: have regular hardforks, lets say once every two years on the same date. any changes requiring hardforks can be included in the next one, if there are none, you could say its "wasted" hardfork. at the moment nobody fucking knows if core will actually allow a hardfork ever, and if they will when. this doesnt allow any planning, especially for third party coders maintaining their software. if we would have a hardfork every two years on April 1st (or whatever) you could easily implement protections in your wallet implementation, for example.and i know that miners were blocking segwit, just like core is blocking any hardforks. no one is blameless in this shitshow.
>>9542709bitcoin wouldn't be worth $8000 if a bunch of basement dwellers are able to change it whenever they wanted and you can forget about institutional adoption, ETFs or becoming a global reserve currency. Developers can fuck up, developers can bought, developers can make wrong economical decisions, ..etc centralized develeopment = centralized coin. that being said, I like XMR hardfork approach, XMR is not bitcoin, it's not digital gold, it still has lots of room for improvement and shouldn't let immutability get in the way, we need only one digital gold, one decentralized coin, the rest of the coins can do whatever they want. >and i know that miners were blocking segwit, just like core is blocking any hardforks. no one is blameless in this shitshow.segwit breaks one type of asicboost that gives Jihan an advantage, that's why he stalled it, even jihan's friend, mcafee said "core is punishing jihan". Segwit is blocksize increases (for segwit transaction).
>>9542791*segwit is a blocksize increase
>>9542677>he wanted to create a trustless system. The big blocks model relies on trustLightning nodes are subject to censorship and regulation. Big blocks are just the same blockchain... with bigger blocks. Satoshi is on record as theorising bitcoin would become the provenance of "large server farms". Farms which would follow consensus rules. I know which I'd rather trust.>his goal is fucking central banks and fiat, no to create an inefficient version of paypal for retards like you.LN is Paypal 2.0, not on-chain scaling.>small blocks = better for decentralization>lightning = scalability and low feesNon-mining nodes do not contribute to the network. Congrats on being the flat earther equivalent of crypto. LN will fill 1MB blocks at such a scale, so the block size has to be raised anyway.LN is a joke and you ate that shit right up. I understand that you bought in at 19k and you're desperate to recover your investment but I'm afraid you bet on the wrong horse. Doesn't really matter because for every one uneducated brainlet like you there are ten people who will read this post, double check the facts themselves and wake up to the fact that Blockstream has sold the crypto community a dream. And it is them I am truly addressing. You're just a tool I can use to demonstrate a point.
>>9542791who the fuck knows, maybe btc would be worth 20k now if we wouldve avoided the whole december bullshit ($50 fees, transactions being stuck for days, etc).i would argue that having consistent hardforks would actually improve predictability and stability (something institutions care deeply about). like i said, at the moment, nobody knows when or even if a hardfork will ever happen. and i have no clue why you think having regular hardforks would cause centralization. the process would remain unchanged: a group of developers (core) publicly discuss what would be included into each hardfork. no one central figure with final say.i know about asicboost, no need for a history lesson here. also, the blocksize increase from segwit is just a ridiculous accounting trick which greatly increases technical debt. it wouldve been a lot easier and beneficial in the long run to have a hardfork with slightly increased blocksize without tricks and also implement the malleability fix (which wouldve negated asicboost) without spaghetti code.
>>9542851lightning nodes that anyone can easily run will be subject to censorship and regulation, but big central server farms wont? get the fuck out with your brain tumors, retard.if ln becomes paypal, it doesnt affect btc in any way, the main protocol is still safe and decentralized. otoh, ver already said hes willing to risk bch becoming second paypal (direct quote). again, gtfo.
You fuckers thinking core will increase the blocksize are delusional. Core devs are advocating for smaller blocks. Big blocks goes against blockstreams business model. You see, they want small blocks so your coins get trapped on lightning so if you need to liquidate then you have to use blockstreams centralized Liquid.
>>9540571>BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASHBCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH
>>9542393>>9542360a non mining node cannot change what is being accepted into the block only a mining node canyou have to trust miners with 1mb blocks or 1kb blocks. Non mining nodes have zero ability to change what miners want to dothat's the great irony you hate roger, calvin, nchain and bitmain but you literally have to trust them to not cause a chain death spiral on btc as they are publicly suggesting they willgiven that non mining nodes do nothing there is not a single reason to have a blocksize limit.
>>9543013you fuckers who dont understand that blockstream and core are separate entities need to neck yourselves asap. blockstream devs account to smth like 10% of contributions to core last time i checked and basically every commit is publicly debated.
>>9543090This guy doesnt get it
>>9542851You are being cucked by a small chinese man and a mnachild crybaby conman. This is what both absolute delusion and a paid shill looks like folks.
>mfw Roger thinks his half mil investment will pay off>mfw his investment doesn't pay off and bcash goes to zero
>>9541891Notice how Craig Wright is in the middle seat, Roger Ver litterly sucks his dick
Is BCash the biggest Pump and Dump scam ever?
>>9542954BCH works fine without large scale server farm nodes no matter how huge it gets or how persistent the attacker. If they take out the bigger mining nodes, the smaller mining nodes just take over. Transactions might go up to reflect the market cost of the smaller miners now needing to deal with more traffic, but nothing stops.By contrast, you take out the hubs in the lightning network and there is now no longer a solution for the vast majority of the users to find routes period. Or you could be more subversive than "taking them out" and simply impose your regulations there. While imposing regulations at a large mining node would do nothing at all to the entire rest of the complete graph that still mines transactions you're trying to control.In conclusion, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about and >>9542851 has been beating the shit out of you for months. Give up already.
>>9540596FugBiz told me LN wasn't readyFuck you for lying to me as usual
>>9543600imagine if segwit wasn't stalled for 2 years by Jihan
>>9543635imagine if on chain scaling wasn't held up for three+ years by core.
>>9540571https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/address/bitcoincash:qqmm8lr9jm4klk6jdmxdhv2hlta07chmjss3ydkka068 transactions, 0.23429961 BCH receivedsuch bribe, much corruptiontotally not just a demonstration that it worksedit: tweet got deleted just now, i must have been almost the last one to see it
>>9540596>>9543600it's so sad that this video is the go-to demonstration of LN. if LN truly were ready there would be a ton of these videos but nope, there's just this one.and it shows a direct channel so no network routing through other channels. and it doesn't show the channel setup (which is a normal BTC transaction). and it doesn't show 100 attempts in a row, all successful (impossible with LN). also LN still doesnt scale at all, nobody know how it will route. unless a backbone of super hubs are used or course but nobody wants that right?
>>9540571>buying services is badWhy do you hate free market capitalism?>within a year or two.bilderberger bootlicking corecuckolds have been saying 1-2 years since 2015
>>9543950it's not a direct channel and he paid routing fees. >unless a backbone of super hubseven if that happens, it's not an issue, decentralization at the first layer is what matters
>>9544063BCH is more decentralised at the first layer, it's not subject to the endless stonewalling of a group of economically ignorant halfwits who think they're geniuses. Both chains are mined by the exact same people, and the exact resources needed to support a throughput of x on chain y are needed to support a throughput of a on chain b. The only difference is that one chain isn't artificially constrained, but the resources you used to validate at one speed on one chain can be used to validate at the exact same speed on the other chain.Once again, you have no idea what you're talking about and the more shit you spew the worse you make your position look.
>>9540571I'm not retarded.
>>9544063And as people in here have now been telling you for months, and it appears you've finally accepted, lightning *WAS DESIGNED* to be centralised. Even if you think decentralisation at the first layer mitigates that, although you're wrong, you don't seem to follow your observation through to the natural conclusion; the core dev team purposely sabotaged BTC in order to force all traffic through a network that they *FUCKING DESIGNED* to be centralised.If that isn't everything you need to know about the situation, there's really no helping you and you should just put yourself out of your own misery.
>>9544063dont spread lies, i checked his twitter when the video was new and he said he opened the channel with the shop himself some time before the video>even if that happens, it's not an issuejust like it's not an issue of the backbone of the internet goes down right?
Core cant die off fast enough, all it does is stagnate the whole market and its reputation is harmful and its followers are the worst.
>>9544107>>9544147your desperation is really showing. LN gets centralized: if you don't like a hub, close your channel and choose another one. bitcoin is still trustless. Layer 1 gets centralized because of big blocks: no way to verify miners follow the rules, bitcoin is no longer trustless, miners get to fork whenever they want. as shown here: >>9542393 >>9542432 >>9542448 >>9542469literally segwit2x was called off because miners told Jeff (the retarded segwit2x dev) that they won't mine more than 12 hours at a loss.for noobs: did you know that miners in the past ignored the reward halving and it was full nodes run by users that rejected their blocks and made them respect the rule again? >and it appears you've finally acceptedonly in your delusional brain. these $4000 bags must be really heavy. >>9544171another desperate shill. This is the original video and it's available on his twitter account, he says no such thing.
>>9544147listen, guy. It is designed that way because for any system to work and be useful, it has to have a high degree of centralization ok?Don't even bother trying something decentralized. I promise it wont work. Just relax.
>>9544270yes i love "shilling" facts about how bad LN ishttps://twitter.com/danielalexiuc/status/993667149238435840i cant find it now because he either deleted it or its inside a reply thread. either way i know for a fact he doesn't demonstrate it working several times in a row in the video. you know just as well as me that it's down to luck whether or not a payment actually goes through in lightning networkeven IF it would work every single time, which it doesn't, it's not a good idea with a system where someone else can spend the money in your channel to someone. so one day you go to the store and try to shop but looks like you dont have money in your channel. sure you have not lost the total amount of money but the channel is spent and you need to either open a new one with the store now or refill the channel. on-chain. very bad system.
>>9544171>just like it's not an issue of the backbone of the internet goes down right?anyone can start a lightning hub, not anyone can start an ISP even if has billions lol. bitcoin is not p2p by the way, it's peer-to-miner, and that's ok, you know why? because it's a trustless system, you can verify that the miners didn't break the rules, and if the miner doesn't mine your tx, another one will. Same for lightning. Whether it becomes centralized or not, it's still trustless. Big blocks would break the trustless system. Even big blockers don't deny that we must trust the miners.
>>9544374*hub goes down*all of a sudden 10% of the network is unreachable"just wait until someone opens a new channel on-chain lol""you'll be able to transact within a few hours again lol"
>>9544370literally he says in a reply to the tweet within hours from posting the video it's not a direct channelyour desperation is showing, and even if it was a direct channel, wouldn't change anything. >even IF it would work every single time, which it doesn't, it's not a good idea with a system where someone else can spend the money in your channel to someone. so one day you go to the store and try to shop but looks like you dont have money in your channel. sure you have not lost the total amount of money but the channel is spent and you need to either open a new one with the store now or refill the channel. on-chain. very bad system.no one is forcing you to be a routing node, retarded shill. very very desperate.
>>95444031- you would have channels with multiple hubs and regular people. 2- you are retarded if you think there will be only 10 hubs. many exchanges, early adopters, whales, banks, ...etc are waiting to jump on this. 3- this is not the 90s. it's possible to run services with almost a 100% uptime now. DDoS protection is cheap too.
>>9544413yes he claims that it wasn't a direct channel there but im sure ive read otherwise, at the same time he explained he had purchased several times before the videoif everybody arent forced to be a routing node what's even the point? that will REALLY turn the network into centralized backbone hubs.>>9544464ah you were thinking several years into the future, when someone have magically found a solution to the non-working routing system. if there are more than 10 hubs in LN right now the thing would surely fall apart completely. gotta get that centralized backbone up and running!
>>9544464and when a service goes down for hours it's usually because of complex software unique to them. the software for lightning will eventually be tested by millions and become as reliable as bitcoin core.
>>9543537It's not a PnD unfortunately. Bitmain and Roger Ver are in deep with the neoliberal world order:>coinbase full of former Clinton advisers>Bitmain working with Goldman Sachs>Roger Ver is a regular on Alex Jones, a well known zionist disinfo agentThey're seriously trying to flip it and the deep state has a very long track record of using people busted for terrorist activities (Ver) as a way of redemption (gold or lead type scenario)
>>9544413>>9544514reminder: after bcash's last hardfork, about 20% of nodes were forked off because of bad implementation. this is the experience we would get if miners had control over bitcoin.
>>9544532Can you imagine being as deluded as this guy?
>>9544514>will eventually be tested by millionsit's never going to happen buddy>and become as reliable as bitcoin corelol that's impossible, you probably don't know this but bitcoin doesn't actually have address in the network. nobody actually sends anything to anyone, you just broadcast a state update. it's impossible for lightning to beat that.>>9544543no, there were 20% of idle computers running old software. everybody using BCH should know there are planned updates every 6 monthsthe only thing that would happen to these people if they tried to send BCH on the old fork is that the payments wont get confirmed and if they do for some reason - once they switch back to the active fork the money will still be there
>>9544510>if everybody arent forced to be a routing node what's even the point? that will REALLY turn the network into centralized backbone hubs.explained earlier: >>9544270LN gets centralized: if you don't like a hub, close your channel and choose another one. bitcoin is still trustless. Layer 1 gets centralized because of big blocks: no way to verify miners follow the rules, bitcoin is no longer trustless, miners get to fork whenever they want. as shown here: >>9542393 >>9542432 >>9542448 >>9542469 btw, each hashpower of most proof-of-work is belong to a maximum of 2-3 pools, these are the danger.it's funny that a bcash shill is advocating for a real centralization and a switch to a trust based model while simultaneously attacking a potential harmless trustless model.
>>9542677>small blocks = better for decentralizationjust gonna leave this pic related here...
>>9544587Can you imagine living in such a bubble that you believe Roger Ver and his pose of cunts fighting for freedom? I bet you can't cause you're just a paid cockroach coincidence theorist
>>9544598>everybody using BCH should know there are planned updates every 6 monthsto quote thomas zander from this post: >>9542448"yesterday we learned that 2 weeks from now we will have a hard fork, and the code is written and "chosen".all he had to do is notify the world he wanted to do a hard fork and miners agree. I'm pretty sure this is not something he came up with yesterday. The problem is he didn't give anyone any time"Even if everyone gets notified, a 6 month update is a disaster, it's worse than android apps (updates are usually not obligatory). I don't want my money/gold to get updated every 6 months, especially when the development and decision making is completely centralized. what a shitcoin.
>>9544702*posse I don't care what they fight for, if I can sell it for significantly more than I bought it, I see absolutely no issue. Roger Ver is doing all the shilling FOR ME.
listen, retarded bcash shills, we wouldn't have a problem with your shitcoin if you didn't try to scam people by claiming it's bitcoin.>centralized development>very centralized mining>protocol is very mutable (updates every 6 months)>"pre-mine" by bitmain by gaming the difficulty algorithm and fixing it later when he accumulated enough>trust based model (don't run a full node, trust the miners to follow the rules)it's literally the opposite of bitcoin, I tolerate Ripple more than this piece of shit.
>>9544270> LN gets centralized: if you don't like a hub, close your channel and choose another one.Not when they have majority of supply locked up, not when you have no means to even reach another node without their routing information. LN was designed to be centralised and forced in via the artificial scaling limits on chain, BTC is not trustless at all anymore.In the meantime, there *IS NO CENTRALISING LAYER ONE* it's a near complete graph, while miners remain, blocks are constructed and transactions flow, period. And you can verify that the rules are being followed always simply by examining any given block and checking it against the rules, a violation of the rules doesn't cease to exist once it's been made, so it doesn't need to be validated in real time.And miners know this, which is why they'll never do it anyway, because even if they could get away with it until the next fastest node on the network caught up, as soon as that happened it would be out of the bag and the network would suffer as a result> for noobs: did you know that miners in the past ignored the reward halving and it was full nodes run by users that rejected their blocks and made them respect the rule again?That's a flat out lie you stupid cunt.
>>9544349we had to kill the decentralisation of the network in order to save the decentralisation of the network, yeah, I get it. just stupid cunts like >>9544374 doesn't.
>>9544413> a routing nodeLook at this stupid cunt, he says it out loud himself, a routing fucking node, like he knows exactly what it is and means. He's just being stupid on purpose so he doesn't have to admit he's wrong.
>>9544795> claiming it's bitcoin.We wouldn't have a problem with your shit tier bildeberg axa financed centralised fork either, if you didn't try to scam people by calling it Bitcoin, which has from inception been diametrically opposed to the goals you forced on it through Segwit/LN you goofy cunt, neck yourself.
>>9545040>That's a flat out lie you stupid cunt.you expose yourself as a noob for not knowing that. The miners did try to mine 50 btc rewards after the last halving, full nodes rejected their blocks, only then they obeyed the rules. >BTC is not trustless at all anymore.you are a technology illiterate who doesn't know what trustless mean, or pretending to. > And you can verify that the rules are being followed always simply by examining any given block and checking it against the rulednot when the blocks are huge, retard, you would need near data center infrastructure to run a full node. go review the narrative with your handlers. Roger, Craig and all big blockers says miners are incentivized to be gud bois and you should trust them like a good little cuck. they actually say full nodes harm the network. these are the people you are shilling for.>they have majority of supply locked upyou only have control over your funds, if the other party misbehaves you can close your channel and release your funds. >which is why they'll never do it anyway,already proven wrong by the 2016 incident and by segwit2x, they explicitly say they would have forked if it weren't for the full nodes. we would get updates every 3 months like your shitcoin.even if they didn't have a shitty history, bitcoin is meant to be trustless, if you don't want that go use Ripple, retard.the irony is that censorship is a bigger threat at layer 1. there is already software that blacklists tainted UTXOs. jihan owns several pools that have more than 50% of the hashing power.literally everyone of your arguments is false for layer 2 and actually can be used against layer 1.>>9545066as I said, you are a technology illiterate>>9545101>segwit>forcedliterally everyone, even Jihan, agreed to segwit. you embarrassed yourself enough for today, go take a break and review the narrative with your handlers.
>>9545419You just doubly proved yourself a stupid turbo nigger, last halving was from 25 to 12.5, not 50. It hasn't been 50 for years. And it's still a fucking lie you worthless sack of shit. Miners mined the present blocks because all fucking node software for years has had the halving schedule active right now baked into it, and anyone intelligent enough to know how to change that schedule would know every other fucking node would ignore their invalid blocks. Christ you are such a witless cunt I am utterly stunned by it. And you're wrong about everything else as well, you can examine a terabyte block one transaction at a time on a fucking rpi you clueless cunt. Just not in real time. But it doesn't need to be in real time to expose a violation of the consensus rules, and once said violation is apparent the damage is done you clueless fuck. And likely not by some sad fuck like you with his rpi in mummies basement but by one of the other thousands of major economic nodes incentivised to police it, in real time even.You have no idea what the fuck you're talking about and are literally just vomiting nonsensical core talking points. Unironically kill yourself you worthless fuck.
>>9542709>nobody fucking knows if core will actually allow a hardfork everlies... core has said multiple times that they will reassess when quantifiable data has been received pertaining to technological advancements in storage space, bandwidth, and processing power.
>>9545595look at this nigger, the SUM you fucking retard, not a single reward.>fucking node software for years has had the halving scheduleyou don't even know that the miners for a long time didn't even verify blocks >But it doesn't need to be in real time yeah people should weeks for their machine to verify a single transaction and spend thousands of dollars on bandwidth, storage and electricity. but muh fees muh poor people. >and once said violation is apparent the damage is doneSounds good to me if I was the chinese gov. Fuck up the chain, upgrade the protocol, do whatever you want, people would be helpless and find out way later when it's impossible to reverse the damage without bankrupting everyone. > by one of the other thousands of major economic nodesgo use Ripple, retard, more reputable than chinese miners and shady exchanges, they have MIT, Microsoft, ..etcyour IQ is too low for me to continue this discussion, you are also very ignorant, consider killing yourself.
>>9542851>Non-mining nodes do not contribute to the network.more lies
>>9545695Who cares what they say? This is a trustless system, the very fact you have to trust them even if they were not proven saboteurs and liars invalidates that attribute.
>>9545756you still don't get what trustless means retard.>picNothing wrong with creating private sidechain for special purposes. Go create yours.
>>9545741Yes the sum has not been fifty for years you clueless fuck. Miners validate transactions or they can't produce valid blocks. The validation time of a single transaction in isolation is invariable regardless of block size. Absolutely nothing you have said is true at all and you are a useless lying cunt wasting time.
>i run a node because it lets me reject blocks! if I pretend the block doesn't exist then it no exist! last week i was sad about not having a million bitcoins so I rejected every block so far that says i'm not rich.
>>9545809No, you don't get what trustless means, which is why you can trust proven liars and saboteurs who forced in a trust based design and still think you're using a trustless system. But that's in keeping with every other idiotic thing you've said so not surprising at all.
>>9545813>what's consensus >>9545812the sum of the rejected rewards in several blocks, jesus fucking christ, even a chimp would have understood by now. just kys.
>>9541942He has said that he has sold almost all of his btc.
>>9545852You're full of shit and have no idea what the fuck you're talking about.
Guys when arguing with classic shills don't buy into their small blocks vs big blocks narrative.It's all about the asicboost and control over Bitcoin.
>>9545931You literally just called Satoshi Nakamoto a lying cunt.I swear I'm gonna destroy your altcoin.
>>9545841found the shill
>>9545991I don't have an altcoin, and you're doing a great job destroying your own just fine with your absolutely batshit insane unhinged from reality nonsense.
>>9545931>doesn't know the differnce between the two asicboostsJihan was using and building into his asics the asicboost functionality before anyone knew what it was. it's a proven fact. nice try shills
>>9546036Projecting. And no matter how many times you repeat your lies it doesn't make them true. Non mining nodes don't make a cryptocurrency anymore than televisions make a tennis match.
>>9546075> ASICBOOST IS EVIL BUT NOT THE KIND WE USE.More bullshit, complete lack of evidence. Exactly the same nonsense you've spewed the entire thread.
Jihan Wu is the owner of the largest network of Mining Nodes in the world... the reason why him and his shills want people to think non-mining nodes are useless is in the last line of pic related.
>>9546101stop spamming the thread with your retardation and use Ripple, retarded nigger shill. literally two posts, one by segwit2x dev and the other by thomas zander (bitcoin classic's lead dev) prove you wrong: >>9542393 >>9542432get a new job or dump these heavy bags before they bcash becomes $0.
>>9546136Saying miners have limited power is the height of corecuck propaganda.
>>9546125I just got here bitch but I got all day to blow your shilling ass out of the water
>>9546148miners follow the money: >>9542393 >>9542432
>>9546148saying mining nodes have all the power is the height of cashie propaganda.
>>9546146All any of that says its that nodes allow you to verify that produced blocks match consensus rules. Not that they allow you to produce blocks, not that they allow you to influence the flow of produced blocks, just spectate, exactly like your TV allows you to watch a tennis game and you can't do shit about how it unfolds and if you want to reject a referee decision that don't know or even give a fuck. You have no idea what you're talking about. It's that simple.
>>9546136it isn't clear in the pic... let me read it off for you.>A powerful miner is able to execute some serious attacks, but because full nodes rely on miners only for a few things, miners could not completely change or destroy Bitcoin.
>>9546190you absolute fucktard... validating nodes are The Chair Umpire in your game of tennis bitch
>>9542611>Changing the purpose of something is badYeah man Amazon really went down hill after it changed from just being an online book store.You're fucking retarded. No one cares about a global currency for buying starcucks, that already exists and will always need a large inflating supply of low nomination value.What doesn't exist and needs to is a permanent store of wealth that is transferable over the internet/future networks - think space age. Bitcoin is the first time such a product has ever been made, if you die you literally take it with you. Way better than shares, money, gold, land - all that shit can be taken from you. If you memorize your key no one can take it from you. The value of that in future space age is around $10m /btc
>>9540571bcash has the dirtiest pieces of shit i've ever seen
>>9540571/biz/ too new to crypto to remember that Bitcoin was about getting as many people onboard as possible in as short a time as possible. BTC can't do it anymore and there's a massive fud campaign trying to stifle the growth of BCH now. You'd have to be literally retarded not to see the attack on the idea of Bitcoin that has been occurring, now directed at BCH.
>>9546190>allow you to verify that produced blocks match consensus rulestrue>Not that they allow you to produce blocks,true>not that they allow you to influence the flow of produced blocksfalse. miners mine for profit, if the users reject their blocks, they will mine something else or follow consensus.Jeff literally says miners can't mine at a loss for more than 12 hours. READ THAT OUT LOUD YOU FUCKING RETARDED NIGGER UNTIL YOU GET THE POWER OF FULL NODES. here's an analogy for you retarded brain:full nodes = customersminers = supplierif no one buys from the supplier, he loses money. get it one, you absolute retard?
>>9541925Thank god lightning isn't adopted. Can't believe they are still pushing it even though it's proven that it can't work in practice.
>>9546190your analogy is wrong. we the hodlers are the economic majority, the moment I see the main chains rules violated:I reject the blockI complain onlineI sell the coin We are the refrees. It's this simple.
>>9546181Power in a real cryptocurrency is dispersed. As compared to btc where it is utterly centralised, and whatever the core dev team says goes. By contrast in real trustless decentralised cryptocurrencies like BCH, multiple full node implementors decide on a set of consensus rules regarding which they agree, to the extent they can't a fork happens and the new asset is evaluated by traders on exchanges, and then miners mine whatever is most profitable and liquidate it for the assets they want, be that fiat or different cryptos or just holding. The point is no single party has a trusted position sgd everyone has power dispersed to some extent, if traders don't trade what the market really values their portfolio will suffer long term, if miners don't mind the most profitable coin they leave money on the table, if node developers hard fork for trivial reasons they may not even get added to an exchange, and even if they do they may be valued much lower than the other fork of the chain. Trustlessness sgd dispersal of power holds. In BTC though whatever the core devs say goes, and any obstacle to those commands is "an attack on bitcoin" up to and including maintaining the original properties of bitcoin so central to the project they were in the fucking title of the white paper; peer to peer electronic cash, then mindless paid shills lie their fucking asses off in threads like this hoping they can distract people from noticing all of the above.It's not fucking working. Everybody knows what's going on and they've been watching you fail miserably here for months now. The more shit you spew the more desperate you look. Keep it up.
>>9546215No, you're just some stupid fuck in your mom's basement with a raspberry pi, the referee is the collection of all miners put together who cross validate all blocks amongst themselves and will discard blocks that don't build on consensus rules, and major economic nodes like exchanges and large payment processors. They matter, you're just a waste of perfectly good oxygen.
>>9546259The net total of all full nodes across the network, many of which are just as fast and well connected as the fastest of the mining nodes. Once again, your raspberry pi node doesn't fucking matter. The game goes on with or without it, she the major economic nodes can afford to run just as well and fast and at just the same scale as the mining nodes.
>>9546292No, you are some useless cunt with delusions of adequacy. If you can move the market price then your opinion matters, and it's not because of your shit tier raspberry pi node, it's because of your stake in the system. But since actually you have no ability to move the price at all, and you don't mine either, you're worth absolutely fuck all. While plenty of miners not only mine but by themselves also have the ability to move the price.
>>9546297wow that was a whole lot of fuckshit. I feel terrible just having to have read that looking for a intelligent thought, one. Not only did I find pure drivel. But, it is the exact situation that you are describing BCH to be in right now... Bitcoin ABC is the full node implementation of bch right? bitcoin ABC is developed by one dude, right? bitcoin ABC is not opensource software, right? bitcoin cash hard-forked to 32MB blocks leaving 20% of their bitcoin ABC user base behind on the old chain, right? you literally explained the development nature of bitcoin cash. Bravo!
>>9546332>>9546374And who are you, fag in a smelly office tasked to convince people online that they don't matter, that some Wright is Satoshi and more nonsense.Let that sink in, you have no power over here.
>>9546427Everything you just said was wrong. And that's not a change in pattern for you at all.
>>9546433I'm just some random guy who actually understands how the system works and has spent the past few months watching shills like you get the shit kicked out of you every single day because you either don't, or pretend not to.
>>9546433he's some kind of pool operator who mines bitcoin... he brags about himself all of the time... I know it's him because he uses the same tired screencaps of nonsense. Oh and he mines btc kek
>>9546490>shill tactic #17: call the other guy a liar and keep calling him a liar no matter what.good one...
>>9546549Great rebuttal, super covincing. Lying sack of shit with zero evidence for your ridiculous claims.
Daily reminder that twitter is filled with bcash sockpuppet accounts (created years ago + history wiped out). One of roger's employees got caught but roger pretended he has nothing to do with him:https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/87xkd2/how_bitcoincom_handles_reports_of_employees_using/This thread is also filled with shills and salty bagholders. No rational user would voluntarily cuck himself to miners. Jihan is a billionaire chink with a small dick who wants 100% control. We saw what he did to Monero (secretly mine it for months, sell miners when exposed, fork to save his bricked ASICs, rent hashpower to pull reorg attack, ..etc)
>>9546577we know about the reddit shills since they came years ago when classic was the thing.but I don't remember exactly when they found about 4chan
>>9546577Daily reminder that stupid cunts like this have been getting their asses handed to them in debates daily for months now, and despite it being public record that their side is financed by bildeberg, AXA and mastercard, honestly expect to distract from the transparent sabotage of bitcoin by fearmongering about muh chink miners and muh roger.
I'm just wondering what comes next, they start trolling on deep wep, dark markets and whatnot?
>>9546642>their side is financed for a "truth" lover you do like to embellish it a lot.
>>9546692It's not embellishment. Blockstream's funding is public record and your picture has nothing to do with it.
wtf..... scammin' roger can't keep getting away with this...
>mfw 0xBTC is literally better than Bitcoin Cash
>>9546642>their side is financed by bildebergMy side is a protocol, it's not a human being or a company, it can be financed, your side is chinese miners. Very pathetic. >cobraUsing a shill/autist/retard/delusional person as an example doesn't help your case. He said he was 100% sure halong mining is a scam countless number of times even though he had no proof and didn't back down until tens of users sent him pics of the miners after shipping. Literally every poll/event show overwhelming support for Bitcoin.
>>9546427>bitcoin cash hard-forked to 32MB blocks leaving 20% of their bitcoin ABC user base behind on the old chain, right? you literally explained the development nature of bitcoin cash. Bravo!He is trying too hard. Bcash's development is very centralized: >>9542448 >>9542469
Me uhhhh cleaned up the image *sweating.gif*
>>9546838Your side is stuck firmly to the end of Maxwell's cock. Nothing more, nothing less. And he is a proven bildeberg AXA mastercard stooge. You're ignoring that fact doesn't change it. My side is... What the fucking white paper defined bitcoin as ten years ago. And I give less than a fuck about your internecine bitching about your fellow corecucks.
>>9546893every commit is reviewed and/or debated by several developers from several companies. It's an open process. Development of bcash is controlled by few individuals behind closed doors. >>9542448 >>9542469
>>9546813We're all gonna make it brehs
>>9540571why the fuck is ver asking his followers to send money to some fucking rich chink?the absolute statealso, how tiny IS ver? at that height he's a guaranteed bottom, i guess
The fork was about fixing asic boost.I don't see anywhere in the whitepaper a mention that it is fine to keep critical vulnerabilities in Bitcoin.In fact Satoshi himself did many significant forks that changed the original incorrect rules (fixed mistakes). Including introducing the 1MB base block cap of Nakamoto.Bcash are the incorrect rules
>>9546921The very fact they can force through controversial changes like segwit and rbf, whilst permanently canceling the original scaling plan proves that's a lie. All BTC development happens under these conditions; the core council sets the goals, and nothing, not even the original plan sgd purpose of the project, gets through if they don't want it to.Lie to yourself all you want. Nobody else believes it.
>>9546921>Development of bcash is controlled by few individuals behind closed doors.that's enough to scare me running and screaming in the opposite direction. Hell, even rippled (ripple's daemon) is opensource.source>https://github.com/ripple/rippledbitcoin cash is more centralized than Ripple! large kek!!!
>>9546983Lying sack of shit, you just called asicboost a critical vulnerability despite the fact the only proven hard documented production use of it was on slush pool btc using halong equipment.By your own logic that's an exploit of a critical security flaw.
>>9546987bitcoin cash was forked so Jihan Wu's mining monopoly could make all the rules
>>9546987>force through controversial changes like segwit lmao. still repeating the same nonsense. only a shill would do that. As I said before, literally everyone agreed to segwit, even Jihan. Dispute is about the blocksize, not segwit. >original scaling planyou can't scale by increasing blocksize, brainlet. Bitcoin needs to process trillions of transactions per second, and segwit is a blocksize increase. >the core council sets the goalsrejecting a hardfork is literally the opposite of setting goals. Bitcoin isn't an android app to be toyed with every 6 months like bcash. >Lie to yourself all you want. Nobody else believes it.the only supporters for your shitcoin are sad shills like you and bagholders. Every poll/event show overwhelming support for Bitcoin.
>>9547079Bitcoin cash was forked so your shit tier bildeberg sabotage attempt would fail >>9546893, despite convincing many useful halfwit cunts like yourself it was a positive
>>9547132jamie, you did well today, now go take a break.
>>9547120Segwit never got more than 34 percent approval before the segwit2x bait and switch, it was forced through whether you acknowledge it or not. You can scale a lot higher than 7tx sec by increasing on chain throughput. You can't scale at all by permanently imposing an artificial limit for no reason and forcing in a centralised second layer. That's not just not scaling, it's changing the entire nature of the product and turning it into a shitty paypal ripoff. No sybilproof polls ever show support for core, just anything that can be astroturfed and shilled online. Meanwhile in real life anyone who has the faintest clue what's going on knows core is nothing but sabotage.
>>9547120>trillionsexcept it doesn't, and was never able to because the blocksize is too small>segwit is a blocksize increasethat breaks the digital chain of signatures and turns bitcoin into a chain of digital hashes. this alone makes it not bitcoin
The two of you can lie till you're blue in the face. It won't change the facts one iota, and you're going to lose everything because of it.Enjoy.
>>9547199>You can't scale at all by permanently imposing an artificial limit for no reason and forcing in a centralised second layerThen tell me, why the man whose paper you worship introduced the 1MB cap.
If anyone is interested... this blog explains how Jihan Wu operates. https://medium.com/@shaolinfry/litecoin-china-roundtable-and-uasf-40b2cdd18611He has a history of fucking with the blockchain by way of his mining monopoly to get what he wants... He didn't want SegWit on Litecoin either... so he fucked with the litecoin miners.the only way to secure the bitcoin network form these chink thugs is to run your own full bitcoin core node.
>>9540596I was reading the other day they lightnetwork nodes are already runing
>>9547166There's no fucking "valid now" about it you stupid cunt, scaling the block size was the plan from the beginning, only stupid fucks like you sabotaging Satoshi's vision in favor of Maxwell's don't know that.
>>9547268Poison block attack, fixed a long, long time ago. http://gavinandresen.ninja/One-Dollar-Lulz
>>9547199miners agreed to segwit (with other things) in meetings, miners signaled for segwit (with other things) in july.they didn't get the other things, but they agreed to segwit. this is a fact, not an opinion. >it was forced through whether you acknowledge it or not. hahaha so you agree that users (full nodes) have power and can force miners?remember what you said you literally cuck:> Non mining nodes have zero ability to change what miners want to do>not that they allow you to influence the flow of produced blocksas I said, take a break, jamie, you are starting to lose it. >No sybilproof polls ever show support for core,actually, one was made for coinbase. Again, every poll/event show overwhelming support for bitcoin. 99% of bcash supporters on twitter are obvious shills like you (old accounts + wiped out history). You only exist on the web. On real life, you are no where to be found.
>>9547244actually it does, ever heard of streamed payments? and the signatures are still there, they are just moved to a different part.
>>9547375The “MAX_BLOCK_SIZE = 1000000” commit occurred on 15 July 2010, which was released in the 0.3.1 rc1 version of the software on 19 July 2010. The commit enforcing the 1MB rule occurred on 7 September 2010, activating at block 79,400. On 20 September 2010, Satoshi removed this activation logic, but kept the 1MB limit.Explain us now, how is it possible that when Craig Wright wanted the next Visa tier network, he added the cap.?Would not it make more sense to leave things "Unlimited"?
>>9545742It isn't a mesh, this passing of transactions from one node to another is a fantasy. The whole network is within 1.x hops.
>>9547327Segwit was sabotage and those who fought it were right to do so. Post segwit bitcoin is no longer even a chain of digital signatures. It's shitty. Useless, and was only ever even created because of the lies around hard forks. >>9542123
>>9547437They agreed to segwit contingent upon other things. Those things didn't happen. Segwit was forced through by deception. This is a fact, not an opinion> lol full nodes did it.No, exchanges made clear they would not follow the longest chain despite the being the actual definition of bitcoin and instead they would follow whatever the core team says is bitcoin. Major economic nodes exerted force, not your shitty little rpi node. As a result those that irrevocably disagreed with Maxwell's vision forked off bitcoin cash to executeSatoshi's vision. And now because of rivalrous bidding for hash power, BCH can and likely will freeze the btc chain permanently. > Again, every poll/event show overwhelming support for bitcoin.Not a single shred of evidence. And in real life nobody who isn't a complete idiot or actually paid to spins your idiotic bullshit.
Bcore sockpuppets and corecucks are going balls deep in this thread holy hell. Still no arguments to be seen, obviously.Bitcoin Cash is the real Bitcoin.
>>9547677>still trying to rewrite historyminers signaled for segwit2x, months later, they told jeff and CEOs of segwit2x alliance they won't mine more than 12 hours at a loss so they called off the hardfork. referencing the screenshot for the 100th time:>>9542393"the cancellation announcement originated from learning that miners would not mine on segwit2x beyond T+12 hours after the fork point">No, exchanges made clear they would not follow the longest chain SHAPESHIFT, COINBASE, XAPO, BLOCKCHAIN.INFO and several others said explicitly they will support both and give the bitcoin name to the longest chain. Few ones said they will reject segwit2x. >major economic nodes exerted forceyes, the biggest economic nodes exerted force in favor of segwit2x. >not your shitty little rpi nodefull nodes are the reason the called it off, I'll be quoting jeff until your kys:"the cancellation announcement originated from learning that miners would not mine on segwit2x beyond T+12 hours after the fork point"if it weren't for threat by full nodes, miners wouldn't have backed off, they had the economic nodes on their side.>Not a single shred of evidencebcash events are empty, few bcash supporters exist with real identity, no core devs migrated to bcash, sybil resistant poll (uses coinbase) shows support for btc, every vote on twitter shows support for btc within seconds/minutes from creation, and the most important one: bcash is still an alt.here's a challenge, list 100 twitter accounts for bcash supporters that didn't start tweeting months ago.
>>9547828No shortage of complete fucking lies and unjustified assertions though. It's amazing they don't seem to realise the damage they're doing to their credibility.I went from a btc maximalist to a all coins are maybe valuable and back to a mostly bch is the only valuable thing except a few others, but btc is worth less than nothing just from watching these guys get their asses kicked every day the last few months. When it started out they just had emotional taunts and they weren't even trying to argue for anything but they've recently gotten desperate enough they just lie continuously with zero evidence whatsoever in a really obvious way.It's fucking strange to watch unfold. It really does seem like the bch crew were right all along about AXA / blockstream / Wall Street sabotage and subversion.
>>9547457please tell me you're not referring to how exchanges put all their transactions into one big payment on the networktxhighway.comdo you see trillions of transactions happening?
>>9547954notice the word "potential", retard? streamed payments for videos, file sharing, torrenting, browsing, ..etcthis can never happen on-chain.
>>9547878The bulk of exchange volume said they'd suck core's dick no matter what. Ignore it all you like and deflect with minority trade volume but it doesn't make any difference at all. No matter what shit you spew, your shit tier raspberry pi node does not define a damned thing. And soon your entire chain will be frozen forever anyway so all this is academic. Coinbase is filled with clueless newbies, Twitter isn't sybil resistant. Every other poll you actually have to stake votes says core is the worst thing to ever happen to bitcoin, and real life events consensus vs coingeek, one is all how to suck wall street and state cock, and the other is how to execute on bitcoin. No competition.
>>9540571roger ver will be in prison in the next 10 years. im not joking. the main is a fucking criminal.
>>9548107>still trying to rewrite historyagain, segwit2x had the "economic" majority on its side: COINBASE, SHAPESHIFT, BLOCKCHAIN.INFO, XAPO and several others. These 4 alone control most of the wallets and on chain transactions.Even Bitfinex that invested in blockstream and accused by shills like you of sabotaging bcash said it will support both chains then name the longest chain bitcoin whatever it is. Those that said we reject segwit2x no matter what are a minority. You can't rewrite history. Just stop. You're an embarrassment to all shills. Challenge still stands: list 100 twitter accounts for bcash supporters that didn't start tweeting months ago.As Nick Szabo said: bcash is Centralized Sock Puppetry
>>9548129prison, mental hospital or a coffin. It became obvious to me when he lost in the interview. I kind of feel sorry for him. He's a like a 10 years old kid who never matured but became a billionaire.
>>9548205Repeating yourself doesn't make it true. What you're saying doesn't even make sense. We both admit miners will mine what is most profitable to mine and won't mine what they're not getting paid for, you claim that they'd have gotten paid just fine if they actually followed S2x, I claim otherwise, but you claim because magic, they were compelled to follow your shitty rpi in your mums basement. Alternatively: actually they never had the economic majority, period. But they're building it now and that's why bch will freeze btc permenantly.As for Twitter, BCH has only been distinct from btc for nine months that's not much time left for people to have been tweeting about it, and Twitter is sock puppet central for you and your deluded corecuck buddies, positive tweets about bch are a great way to guarantee you get swarmed with false reports. It just emphasizes my point about your shitty astroturfing campaign.
>>9548326Lost? He fucking annihilated him https://youtu.be/zSbPz4g9rZQ
>>9548129He's got deep connections to the cartel of crypto who are coordinated pumps and suppressing the whole thing. Fuck BTC and fuck BCH. People are losing money they shouldn't lose because people like Ver are making moves. This post is too good not to be true and happening. If you didn't buy bitcoin in the early days, you're fucked. https://medium.com/cryptomedication/uncovering-the-real-cartel-in-bitcoin-65b56a7a00a2
>>9541891>Dr. Craigh Wright>PhD in Theologywew lad>on the same level as philosophy
>>9548015why not? just do what exchanges do and bundle up the payments into one sum on chain when the stream/upload/etc. ends. i'm not sure how processing trillions of tx/s is needed, nor why this can't be done on chain
>>9548437lolphd in theologyholy shitthat guy is scammy in layers like a lasagna
>>9548329>you claim that they'd have gotten paid just fine if they actually followed S2x,hahha wtf? of course not. are you wasting my time now? when I asked you to take a break I didn't mean stop shilling and start trolling. >We both admit miners will mine what is most profitable to mine and won't mine what they're not getting paid for,I say that but you imply the opposite. Hashpower follow the money. The money came from the people. The people run full nodes.>but you claim because magicas promised, quote from jeff (segwit2x dev):"the cancellation announcement originated from learning that miners would not mine on segwit2x beyond T+12 hours after the fork point"HASHPOWER FOLLOW THE MONEY.>Alternatively: actually they never had the economic majority, periodRepeating yourself doesn't make it true. Feel free to dispute.segwit2x had the "economic" majority on its side: COINBASE, SHAPESHIFT, BLOCKCHAIN.INFO, XAPO and several others. These 4 alone control most of the wallets and on chain transactions.Even Bitfinex that invested in blockstream and accused by shills like you of sabotaging bcash said it will support both chains then name the longest chain bitcoin whatever it is. Those that said we reject segwit2x no matter what are a minority. >But they're building it now and that's why bch will freeze btc permenantly.lmao>As for Twitter, BCH has only been distinct from btc for nine months that's not much time left for people to have been tweeting about itnot sure if retarded or a shill or a troll. CRYPTO existed before bcash. I want 100 accounts of bcash supporters who didn't write their first tweet (about crypto) months ago.+99% of bcash twitter accounts are sockpuppets, history wiped out, first tweet about crypto is month ago. I'M 100% SURE that you run at least a sockpuppet account. I would bet my life on it.
>>9548528> THE MONEY.And the money is trade volume you fuck headed turbo nigger. Not whatever you manage to get your shitty rpi in mums basement to accept. That does not and never will matter. Get over it you're fucking wrong.I don't touch Twitter at all because it's filled with fuckwit trolls shills and sockpuppets exactly like you, and it's the fucking definition of a sybil vulnerable fake consensus channel.
>>9548596twitter is awesome entertainment though
>>9548528we have a proof for at least one account by a bitcoin.com employee: jamie redman https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/87xkd2/how_bitcoincom_handles_reports_of_employees_using/If I was a billionaire with no ethics, I would hire shills to work full on twitter too, roger has no shame.
>>9548596>And the money is trade volume you fuck headed turbo nigger. lmao who trades you retarded shill? the people, and the people won't no chink coin.>I don't touch Twitterwe both know it's not true. we both know you have a full time job to shill for miners. you have the worst job in the world. again, I would bet my life on it. Only shills are immune to facts and reason.
>>9548606You just can't stop lying can you? even when it's a well known fact the ceo of blockstream has a permanent shill army on staff and no other evidence except that one guy that one time who was directed to stop or be fired on the other side.You really are actually a paid shill aren't you? Nobody could be unironically this willfully fucking blind and stupid.
>>9548683>no other evidence except that one guy that one time who was directed to stop or be fired on the other side.lmao, "that guy" yeah right 100% solid evidence. >Nobody could be unironically this willfully fucking blind and stupid.that's what I just said about you, are you turning into an echo bot now?
>>9548655> would bet my life on itOk. What will you take as absolute proof you're wrong? If you'll honestly kill yourself, and you'll provide a significant monetary bond on the high likelihood that you'll pussy out like the weak lying cunt you are, I'll provide it. You're swine and you deserve it, and the very simple fact is I'm not a shill, I've been in since 2011 and I'm fucking furious at what core did to bitcoin, those are the facts.
>>9548738> I'm not a shill>What will you take as absolute proof you're wrong? unfortunately, that's an unfalsifiable claim.> I've been in since 2011yeah right, like the 100s of sockpuppet accounts that started tweeting months ago.>I'm fucking furious at what core did to bitcoinno, you are shilling for miners and a conman like roger. You want users to give up their power for miners (because muh incentives). You are nothing but a pathetic shill and I wasted time on you just for fun. bcash is a joke. it's not a threat to bitcoin.
>>9548738>What will you take as absolute proof you're wrong?same fucking shill every thread. this faggot asked me the same thing last week.
>>9548843> unfortunately, that's an unfalsifiable claimWhich is to say you even admit you're absolutely full of shit. I am done talking to you. You're lower than shark shit sabotaging this world changing gift to humankind because you're either too fucking retarded to understand it, or you're being paid. This is the last thing I have to say to you; Honestly, from the heart, die painfully, alone, and preferably on fire.
>>9548848And you too failed to deliver, because not a single corecuck I ever asked was even willing to consider the possibility. That really says everything anyone genuinely interested in the truth needs to know.
>>9548848it's clear he's getting paid to shill here. >And as people in here have now been telling you for months>Everybody knows what's going on and they've been watching you fail miserably here for months now>and has spent the past few months watching shills like you get the shit kicked out of you every single day because you either don't, or pretend not to.
>>9548926>That really says everything anyone genuinely interested in the truth needs to know.you reject indisputable facts, like "economic" support for segwit2x. 100% shill.
>>9548943I posted the same stuff about validating nodes he asked me what I would accept for absolute proof I was wrong... I said how about some absolute proof to which he never replied. I'm thoroughly convinced 100% shill. I don't know what an rpi node for a raspberry pi is.. I run an instance of bitcoin core 0.15.1. My raspberry pi powers my voip server though.
>>9546297awesome image friend
also 5YDn/BOL, should you stay up this late?
>>9546297>Implying that BCH is not the banker coinLosing at 4D chess it bitter