Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[_mr_e]

You are choosing to ignore reality.

How so? Ethereum already displayed how such a fork should work. If the users and miners follow then you have a successful fork. If not, you have an alt. Segwit is another.

 

[freetrader]

Forks are not exclusively reserved for uncontroversial changes. (*)

In the case of BTC v BCH, we have an irreconcilable difference of opinion in our scaling approaches.

You can call BCH an "alt", but that just semantics to me.
It does not convince at all me that your coin will succeed in the market.

(*) yes, we have a difference of opinion on this too, I bet.

How so?

any number of the BTC forks that are still around after 2+ years. Including, prominently, BCH

Whether the emperor has clothes or not is not something on which the opinion of the courtesans matters much.

 

[_mr_e]

Oh I didn't say they wouldn't be around or might fill some niche. But they can't be Bitcoin.

 

[freetrader]

But they can't be Bitcoin.

I'll argue they can become Bitcoin.

If all it takes is dominant hashrate on the same POW.

And if they can become Bitcoin, then they can *be* Bitcoin, because we don't live in the past.

In the present, they may be called Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin SV, or whatever.

 

[_mr_e]

Not if it means breaking consensus and wiping out years worth of economic activity. Crypto mine as well burn in a fire if so.

 

[freetrader]

wiping out years worth of economic activity

That's not the case.

I believe you may have some irrational fear here about competing forks.

It would be more like a waning moon.

If your cryptocurrency is in the lead, a greater risk is that your economic activity is disrupted by exploits of vulnerabilities especially if your network's software stack contains, um, something approaching single points of failure, such as a client with > 95% node market share.

 

[lunar]

The title of the whitepaper is "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System"
not "Bitcoin: A data storage system".

Really? That's the best complaint you've got against Satoshi's whitepaper vision? So BSV is doing exactly as the title says, your issue is, it's doing more than that? As if somehow doing more than the blinkered core devs could conceive of, is a bad thing?


The Code was clearly designed from day one as a timestamping state machine, with data storage and lookup in mind. I'm just surprised its taken 10 years for all of us to see it.​

The worlds first blockchain gif

 

[Dusty]

Hi everybody, I'm back after a long break where a lot of things happenede in my life

I could not read everything but it seems like BSV got a lot of supporters, and that's a bit unexpected.

So I'm wondering if there could be enough interest to add official BSV support to Melis.

This would bring the most advanced multisignature and multiuser wallet into the BSV world, and also one of the most advanced way to securely store funds.

If there is someone willing to donate something to fund the (small) development necessary please write me privately.

Thanks!

 

[_mr_e]

That's not the case.

I believe you may have some irrational fear here about competing forks.

It would be more like a waning moon.

If your cryptocurrency is in the lead, a greater risk is that your economic activity is disrupted by exploits of vulnerabilities especially if your network's software stack contains, um, something approaching single points of failure, such as a client with > 95% node market share.

Obviously, that would mean the incentives of all crypto is broken, which I don't believe is true. But what I do want is a money which can last through many generations of tormoil and global power trips, not one that just resets it's economy every time there's a disagreement. One main chain, consensus or GTFO.

Segwit was beautiful in that everyone got a chance at consensus. First the devs had to dev, then the miners had to signal, then the nodes had to upgrade, then the merchants had to implement and finally the users had to use. Everyone got their say and consensus was reached. And now we have things like Wasabi and users are still incentivized to make efficient use of the chain. This is how it should be.

 

[Otaci]

3000 tps on regtest. Wow. /s

 

[79b79aa8]

@Dusty

just like original BCH supporters (i.e. us), who were bitcoin old-timers, were attacked by BTC intransigents and noobs, original BSV supporters, who were bitcoin cash old-timers, are being attacked by BCH intransigents and noobs.

the hostility you may perceive in the debate is in part a factor of people thinking that keyboard warrioring is a way to defend their investment.

but the fact is that with BSV/BCH we have two very different models -- two concepts of what will drive adoption, what are the development priorities, and whether the protocol can handle all desirable use cases, or is in need of changes and improvements.

the market will decide. but the market will take its time to decide. woolly ideas about consensus are useless. the original bitcoin game theory about miners defending their chain and their investment is not in force in a triple blockchain SHA256 mining race.

the prudent course is to keep all your horses in the race, as the forking mechanism ensures they are all on the same footing. however, as you analyze the situation you might decide to rebalance your holdings. this gives you yet another opportunity to calibrate your risk/reward ratio.

i certainly would welcome a BSV option in melis, and i believe it is likely you find development support from that camp -- it definitely means business.

 

[freetrader]

Oh brother.

[doublepost=1562195872][/doublepost]Oh sister.

[doublepost=1562196020][/doublepost]Oh momma.

[doublepost=1562196780,1562195829][/doublepost]Oh fazha, and also oh Holy Gregory (to whom we owe our calendar)

 

[freetrader]

Freetrader, fascinating how your MO has changed over the last year.

Instead of salty shitting on everything like a buttcoiner, why don't you engage in honest debate?

Now that you all sold out to nChain there's as much "honest debate" to be had with you guys as with the core of Core. That's why.

What is it exactly, that is wrong with Satoshi's whitepaper vision of Bitcoin ?

Not much. Why would you think so?

What is it that you so desparately want to change that it has to be done by trolling honest adoption of Bitcoin?

I'm all for honest adoption of Bitcoin. The stench of censorship, statism, authoritarianism and fraud forms such a heavy cloud around all of BSV that I cannot for a second reconcile it with the Bitcoin that Satoshi envisioned or wrote about.

Satoshi is dead or neutralized, but will not be forgotten.
Long live Bitcoin as peer to peer electronic cash.

Are you not interested in seeing the Metanet develop?

I'm not the least bit interested in the Metanet, from what I've seen BSV people talk about.

Does monetizing every packet of information that traverses the internet, using Bitcoin, seem like a bad idea to you?

Absolutely it does. I come from an age where the culture of the Internet was one of bringing people together, not dividing them.

I'd like Bitcoin to remain permissionless, voluntary, a tool for the self-improvement of people just like a free (as in uncensored, universally accessible) Internet is.

Not a panopticon, not a tool of population control and further enslavement of humanity.

 

[79b79aa8]

> Now that you all sold out to nChain there's as much "honest debate" to be had with you guys as with the core of Core. That's why.

how about recognizing that your interlocutors are qualified to evaluate the situation and come to independent financial conclusions, instead of insinuating that there is some kind of behind the scenes coterie taking bribes?

how about recognizing that the ABC leadership is inept, inexperienced, improvising, divisive, and entirely unlikely to deliver a product fit for worldwide adoption?

 

[freetrader]

ABC leadership shines like the motherfucking Star of Bethlehem in comparison to BSV leadership.

This is the sad truth.

How about YOU recognize it?

 

[79b79aa8]

i recognize that skepticism is warranted all around.

what irks me is the preposterous 'if you are not with us you are against us' mentality. it was in sad display during the last round of BUIPs and left BU marooned in high water.

 

[AdrianX]

Done. Recognized. I hit the like button, it's proof of the shining stars they are. They are true leaders.

 

[freetrader]

At the time someone commented on how it was noticeable how the SV camp voted in bloc fashion.

And the experiences on this forum since then have borne it out, from my perspective.

Adrian, it seems you missed the point.

 

[79b79aa8]

what SV camp? people who came to similar conclusions voted similarly, necessarily.

 

[Zarathustra]

I'd like Bitcoin to remain permissionless, voluntary, a tool for the self-improvement of people just like a free (as in uncensored, universally accessible) Internet is.

Says someone who lead the censorship movement against @Norway.
Peak hypocrisy? Or not yet?

Not a panopticon, not a tool of population control and further enslavement of humanity.

Enabling private and government crime and terror agitators to agitate anonymously is the tool that enslaves humanity. Neither a modern society nor a community in the rain forest can survive with anonymous individuals/organisations. Nothing could be more obvious.