Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[solex]

3000 tps on regtest. Wow. /s

@Otaci Care to share your own stats for a similar test?

Let's keep perspective here: a rate of ~250 million txns per day is waaaay above any sensible level of organic demand for some time.

 

[Jonathan Vaage]

 

[trinoxol]

@_mr_e

What is more important to you? Creating digital cash for 5 billion people, or upholding certain traditional social power structures?

And do you believe that BTC can deliver digital cash for 5 billion people although fees are going to be so high that even Lightning becomes infeasible?

In your mind, will the BSV strategy work to deliver digital cash for 5 billion people?

 

[cypherdoc]

Not sure there is a reason for concern, but thanks @cypherdoc for your concern.

you're welcome:

 

[Otaci]

@Otaci Care to share your own stats for a similar test?

Let's keep perspective here: a rate of ~250 million txns per day is waaaay above any sensible level of organic demand for some time.

I got carried away, I shouldn't have said anything.

 

[freetrader]

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



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.

There's no censorship movement, there's a BUIP to revoke @Norway's membership for acting against the principles he subscribed to in the Articles of Federation.

He can call Bitcoin Unlimited what he does, but I'm not for him doing it as a member of BU.

p.s. I don't think you would last a day in a rain forest, anonymous or not.

Enabling private and government crime and terror agitators to agitate anonymously

If you're so pro-transparency then let's see the investors behind "High Tech Private Equity Fund SICAV" who funded nChain for 300M .

 

[Zarathustra]

> There's no censorship movement, there's a BUIP to revoke @Norway's membership for acting against the principles he subscribed to in the Articles of Federation.
He can call Bitcoin Unlimited what he does, but I'm not for him doing it as a member of BU.

As far as I remember, you supported to ban him even before he called the checkpoint version of BU shitcoin unlimited, and it was just you and an overwhelming minority who supported the ban.

> p.s. I don't think you would last a day in a rain forest, anonymous or not.

That's all you can. Presenting an irrelevant strawman. Zero arguments against the fact, that neither communities nor societies can survive with institutionalized anonymous terror.

> If you're so pro-transparency then let's see the investors behind "High Tech Private Equity Fund SICAV" who funded nChain for 300M .

We could explain the difference between privacy and anonymity to the pseudoanarchist collectivists all the time. It wouldn't help.

 

[freetrader]

I supported revocation of his membership based on his doxxing activities under the sponsorship put out by Craig Wright, because I think that action of his was also bringing BU into disrepute.

We could explain the difference between privacy and anonymity to the pseudoarnarchist collectivists all the time.

Sure, deflect away from the point. Because you have: Zero arguments.

"pseudoarnarchist collectivists"

but you sure have a lot of stereotypes and namecalling
[doublepost=1562239808][/doublepost]

 

[Zarathustra]

> I supported revocation of his membership based on his doxxing activities under the sponsorship put out by Craig Wright, because I think that action of his was also bringing BU into disrepute.

You never supported to ban a user for doxxing thermos, alex B., contrarian and other idiots.

> Sure, deflect away from the point. Because you have: Zero arguments.

You have no points. You have strawmen. Nobody of us supports removing privacy.
If I would have to choose beetween total transparency and total anonymity, I would always choose transparency. Imagine an environment where millions of private and state criminals and terrorists would enjoy guaranteed institutionalized anonymity. Such a society would collapse within weeks.

 

[Norway]

Funny see how the penny drops for the anchor man at 17m 55s into this video.

https://www.infowars.com/watch/?video=5d1d58d8da253000124a5911

"So, almost like an organic, backed crypto currency with data."

"... but if you have a data storage system, then that could be an intrinsic value."

 

[freetrader]

If I would have to choose beetween total transparency and total anonymity, I would always choose transparency.

What you are riding is a strawman that Bitcoin Cash somehow leads to total anonymity when all it does is provide more privacy.

Imagine an environment where millions of private and state criminals and terrorists would enjoy guaranteed institutionalized anonymity. Such a society would collapse within weeks.

How do we know that High Tech Private Equity Fund SICAV is not a money laundering vehicle for criminals or state terrorists?

 

[trinoxol]

It is interesting how many allegedly fraudulent documents appear in that Kleiman court case. I have no time nor interest to verify all of these cases. But the judge will. I'll be very interested to learn whether Craig did anything improper after all.

 

[lunar]

Now that you all sold out to nChain

The insinuation that i've somehow taken compensation rather than used years of evolving, critical thinking, to come to my own conclusions insults both our intelligence.

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.

Bitcoin is a legally binding digital evidence trail. That is a fact. It's not statist or authoritarian it's a neutral, unambiguous, history. If you want it to be something other than that, explain what and why? Your response hints and anonymity, but the Bitcoin Satoshi created, is not this, so your premise is flawed and mixes politics with observation.

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.

So do I, and agree with the goal, of bringing people together, but your method runs exactly counter to this. sunshine is the solution that will bring people together, by ending institutional corruption. Ascribing market value to information doesn't divide or exclude people, it unites them, the most important information and voices rise to the surface. The alternative is a world run by warring anonymous trolls and massive social media campaigns, controlled by competing corporations, placing nonsense, money making, and political agendas on equal footing to established and tested, scientific facts in the search for truth. The internet is not free, that's just an illusion created by giants of tech who sell your private information to the highest bidder. To be free, we must be the voluntary customers not the product.

Bitcoin is permisionless, The Protocol is not. As its name suggests, it's a convention, a rule set for all players to follow, in order to play the bigger and global permissionless game. Changing the protocol creates fifedoms, groups of special interests, who play by their own rules and thus remove the permission of others to freely build.

 

[79b79aa8]

It is interesting how many allegedly fraudulent documents appear in that Kleiman court case. I have no time nor interest to verify all of these cases. But the judge will. I'll be very interested to learn whether Craig did anything improper after all.

indeed. amateur search engine sleuthing over document forgery is futile in a case involving two individuals who made a living in digital forensics.

 

[Zarathustra]

You and @satoshis_sockpuppet gOT bAMbOozLEd by this lie. We didn't.

 

[Zarathustra]

What you are riding is a strawman that Bitcoin Cash somehow leads to total anonymity when all it does is provide more privacy.

The guaranteed provision of anonymous payments for all possible criminal activities is the guaranteed death of any society.

How do we know that High Tech Private Equity Fund SICAV is not a money laundering vehicle for criminals or state terrorists?

If payments are made through regulated, traceable channels, it is possible to find the criminals. If there is a way to anonymise it, then it's not.

 

[cypherdoc]

you're welcome:

lies lies lies

[doublepost=1562260035,1562259241][/doublepost]that's alot. this is what happens when you don't offer bsv mining :

 

[Zarathustra]

“A story has been thought to its conclusion when it has taken the worst possible turn" Friedrich Dürrenmatt

David shares thermos' 'values'.

 

[freetrader]

That changing the protocol removes the freedom of others to build, is a fallacy.
However, it does come with a cost on others, who must weigh for themselves whether they accept the changes.

A protocol which changes *too often* will be abandoned by users who get fed up.

There is a balance to be struck here, between upgrading too often and not upgrading at all even when the protocol clearly must compete against other protocols which do change (improve).

Bitcoin Cash must seek the middle road as long as it has room to improve and opportunity to do so.

On another note - "oopsie":

 

[cbeast]

@freetrader There does seem to be a couple digitally forged documents. They are scans of physical documents. One such document (that I know of) has been shown to not match the original. Not sure if any of these documents can be trusted as real. Craig does claim to have original papers.

Also, there are so many spelling errors, it's hard to believe that it's even a real legal document that anyone would sign.