bitsko
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 730
- 1,532
'hurr, add the bugs back and, these codes is different' -shit argument, relatively pointless premise, but free of ad hom ... thanks freetrader
Last edited:
Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.
- Thread starter cypherdoc
- Start date
Otaci
Member
- Jul 26, 2017
- 74
- 384
We've also not restored the original comments in the source code :-(
I find this pattern a lot in many areas of society. One group of people is rational, dispassionate, well-intentioned and right on the matter. The other is fighting against the truth for personal gain using social tricks.
It is surprising how many issues in politics are like that. There's a pretty clear correct answer that any reasonable and open-minded person can discover after a few hours of research. And when you watch the two political sides debate you see this pattern of one rational side and the other side playing games.
Maybe the brain supports two mostly distinct modes. Either, the individual is capable to succeed based on competence. Or, they subconsciously know that they are not competent. So the brain adapts to that by massively increasing social scheming behavior and psychopathy.
Otaci
Member
- Jul 26, 2017
- 74
- 384
chris pacia is obsessed with bsv and CSW. kinda like how @freetrader is with GCBU and me 
It's not a fantastic belief; it's an observation. People act in opposition to the fundamental belief CSW is wrong, ignoring the instances when he is not.
They are in fact, then allowing themselves to be manipulated by CSW's actions.
Freedom from this tyranny is to think for one's self.
Last edited:
why would CSW risk what's probably now in the hundreds of millions claiming he's Satoshi when all it would take to vaporize that investment is for the real Satoshi to sign a public message stating CSW is a fraud?
I don't buy this.
The Coreans said almost the same thing but in the end they didn't accept BCH.
yep, they whined, kicked, and screamed, just like BCH's like u/zectro trying to take over r/bsv
I don't think you can say that those 50 BTC are part or not part of the 21million bitcoins that might be in existence in the future.
The 21 million number is also not in the code as such.
The number was calculated based on the reward algorithm.
If I remember correctly there will not even be 21 million, it will stop before we get to that number.
- Dec 16, 2015
- 2,806
- 6,088
Except we haven't shown any interest in attacking your chain, unlike the reverse situation (both from BTC and BSV against BCH).
Good thing that you're now free to buy whatever you want.
Competition leads to better products.
here, this should clear up everything:
https://coinmetrics.substack.com/p/coin-metrics-state-of-the-network-d2e
Lol... Next time you guys have a hashwar and one side needs a new ticker can I suggest RPI?
79b79aa8
Well-Known Member
- Sep 22, 2015
- 1,031
- 3,440
can you please explain just how BSV attacked BCH? was it an attack, or the perception of an attack? for in any case, no, CSW did not threaten to stop all trade on Bitcoin Cash for years as they saw fit. that is a mischaracterization.
what CSW said, prudently, was that there should be no expectation of economic activity for two years on the BSV chain. a corollary is that the "organic growth" narrative would no longer apply to BSV.
and this is indeed what has happened. BSV prioritized infrastructure development in preparation for exponential microtransaction growth. it is delivering on both, while delaying proselytization to end users.
technicalities aside, BSV has certainly forked off to do its own thing. the alternative was to have their long-in-the-making, well-considered plan vetted by ABC. we in BU can relate -- except that BU has put nothing behind this project like the extraordinary resources put forth by nChain and Ayre in the deployment of BSV. (while nChain is being granted patents that were applied for long before the BTC/BCH split, BU members are beginning to discuss the desirability of holding IP.)
agreed.
all those millions and this is the best they can come up with? Blockstream Meddle:
https://store.blockstream.com/product/blockstream-capsule/
https://store.blockstream.com/product/blockstream-capsule/
kostialevin
Member
- Dec 21, 2015
- 55
- 147
A lost coin is no longer a coin?
And if a coin exists on the blockchain but it is not indexed, isn't it a coin?
To me lost coins are still coins, even if unspendable, and the fact of not being indexed is just a little bug in the indexing system.
my understanding is that the genesis block was hard coded by Satoshi himself. since the 50 BTC in that block was never a true tx (with inputs and outputs), then it could never be "validated" per se and thus could not be indexed as a "tx ". UTXO's (simply as an output set) as a construct, came years later as I've said many times before from pwuille, probably as a more efficient simple way to access balances via memory vs storage. pwuille et al had to be extremely careful to keep consistent to exclude those coins between the two data set constructs.
I personally don't have an opinion or not about whether one wants to include those in the 21M fixed supply. but as the article states, I think most people agree that they are.
I personally don't have an opinion or not about whether one wants to include those in the 21M fixed supply. but as the article states, I think most people agree that they are.
Last edited:
Latest threads
-
Seek Assistance from Puran Crypto Recovery to Recover Your Stolen Assets
- HarperAnderson
- 0 replies
-
-
-