Bitcoin Forum

Well this sucks, I knew it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rp6DaMiORBU

But at least it proves SegWit is evil and should be rejected ASAP if we want BTC to keep ruling them all.

BTW, ETH, DASH and monero are all PnD vapourware/shitcoins. Only buy/sell it to profit on idiots who actually believe in those. The true innovation is ByteBall (https://byteball.org/) but it is probably going to take a while when it becomes popular mainly because there is no ICO. No ICO = no ICO funds to be spent on paid ads and marketing (point @ ETH and other shit).

Ethereum is no threat because it's not even a currency and their branding is just awful. A taxidriver would never buy ethereum. Dash got it semi-right by ditching "darkcoin" but it has no innovation so it will fade away as soon as the whales have unloaded their stash.

Im not sure if this is a joke? I stopped watching after her first sentence:

"Bitcoin has been infiltrated. That's why its performance has been so poor."

Classic cognitive bias case. You refuse to consume information that contradicts with your established belief system.

We can all agree that this technical issue is alarming for bitcoin's development. First of all what will happen when they accept Segwit inspite of btc unlimited? I am not a technical expert on this matter. What are the effects on the price, adoption etc, and most important why will bitcoin be infiltrated by Segwit and not by bitcoin unlimited? And we should not talk about eth scam. When windows sees that it is nothing more than an fancy monkey in a nice looking suit they will dump it and eth will collapse. dash is going to explode , huge nuke explosion incoming. They are just building their final buble right here. It will be fun to watch when it explodes.

Don't judge people by what they say, judge them by their actions. If you look at the code changes proposed by SegWitCoin then we see a trojan horse (evil). If you look at code changes proposed by Bitcoin Unlimited then we see what the community wants (smaller TX fees). When SegWit goes through banksters will have a way to cut a profit from BTC transactions (being the middle men that they are). When BU goes through the last window of opportunity for banksters to corrupt Bitcoin will effectively close. So it's not really a big question whether BU does not impose the same threat on Bitcoin as SegWitCoin does. You just have to look what they are proposing and accept the good stuff. Whenever in the future it happens that BU is trying to centralize Bitcoin and work against the will of BTC community we can ditch them too the same way we are going to ditch SegWitCoin.

Not at all. But bitcoins performance has not really been poor.

I don't discount the possibility that some bad actors have tried to influence Bitcoin but that isn't a reason why there is no Google coin. I would assume the regulatory hurdles for a Google or Apple to create their own currency would be enormous, as would the target on their back and the risk of failure.

But getting to the real crux here, I see both sides of the blocksize argument. But still it should be made clear, isn't this Amanda from DASH? If so, she has her own conflict of interest in damning Bitcoin.

Anyway,
Her argument (after watching more) is that Blockstream is paying the devs and they are funded by outside interests. But there are over 100 core devs, right? So unless there is a massive case of groupthink, the code should speak for itself as anyone with the skill can review it. It would follow that if lead core devs were being 'turned', a migration away from Core would ensue.

I sympathize with Big Blockers. For those running a business and conducting multiple transactions frequently, rising fees are a big negative. The LN solution would enable scaling but pay fees to certain groups which can be interpreted as not being in line with Satoshi's vision.

Maybe that is right. Or maybe as the system matures it morphs into a more comp sci coder led tool than anarcho-cap one and this is Ver losing relevance as the ecosystem outgrows the need for an evangelist? I don't know.

Yeah, but disagreeing that bitcoin's performance has been 'poor' doesn't count as cognitive bias in any sane person's book.

So, to conclude.. you're the idiot here and tabnloz is spot on.

Next.

How condescending of you.  Sure, they should have watched the whole thing to form a genuine opinion, but it's hardly going to help a discussion to just question someone's view - instead, you could try presenting more information about your view so that they will hopefully take it into account.

And you have a bias bias. The blind assumption that you are less biased than other bears in the forest.

Feckin' thrill shills man..  :o

I'm neither a bear nor do i redside in a forest.. you make a lot of weird assumptions, dude.

wait a fu..n minute.. go back to the bit where you said bitcoins performance was poor.. then try and back that up.. go on.

Yes she is a DASH pumper. But I guess erryone in the crypto business has a preference. So I don't think what she says is absolutely wrong just because she hypes DASH.


I'm secretly hoping that the Core devs are just milking BlockStream dry of funds and that they never intended SegWit to be actually activated. They deliberately made it as tough to get activated as possible so that the good guys would eventually win, and they'd get paid while buying cheap BTC with their massive salaries paid by the Blockstream banksters. Yeah, that would be great.

And the 'good guys' are who?

The ones who want Bitcoin to scale, remain decentalized and free as in freedom.

S bitcoin could split, fork whatever the term is?

It's not a fork/split when 90+ % of the miners choose it. Then it's a peaceful protocol upgrade. On the other hand, SegWitCoin lunatics might want to pull something off when they see themselves losing the battle. They are known to be sore losers and that's the kind of stuff desperate people do.

I was assuming they would go separate ways like ethereum

That's what they want you to believe. That's the boogeyman SegWitCoin mafia uses to scare the public. The reason Ethereum forked so bad was because it is not a truly decentralized token system, it is centrally controlled and planned. Ethereum was corrupt from the very beginning but Bitcoin was not. That's why you can't use Ethereum's failure as an analogy to SegWit / BU debate.

That guy in the clip is talking like one of those crazy religion freaks and preachers. "Why don't they move in? there has to be something going on! why doesn't Google buy Bitcoin?" They are clueless!
They think devs are inserting their own code to destroy Bitcoin, because they haven't been paid... Have you seen the devs? They aren't some poor geeks dwelling in basements and writing code on their old laptops single core laptops...

Some people when making mistakes in trading just cannot believe that it was their fault - so they invent some hidden evil forces to blame them. In 2011 it was always The Manipulator who was responsible for their mistakes, now the stories get more complex.

not sure who you are referring to. but anyway, BTC is increasing in value like a true king while Bitcoin Unlimited adoption is also increasing and segwitcoin is losing the battle like a bitch. pic related

https://s17.postimg.org/hugkz9plr/Screenshot_from_2017_03_12_23_07_07.png

So instead of just labelling her as "expert", you should acknowledge that she is far from impartial. Then, ideally, people can do their own research, make up their own minds.

Just because someone on the Internet labels someone else as expert does not mean you should not do your own research. I personally think that what she says is highly plausible in this context. Does not take a genius to see that SegWit is funded by bankers and without it blockstream will probably go bankrupt.

google owns blockstream
and blockstream  owns the core devs
BUT the government owns google

there is only one way out of this,
dump the core


would it be all that surprising to be presented  with definite proof all this?  FUCK NO!  :D

good theory i like it.

She isn't talking about Bitcoin price you fucking numbskull.

She is talking about the performance of the protocol itself, which quite frankly, is fucking shit. No way would I use Bitcoin to buy anything other than drugs, cos experience has taught me that there is a strong chance of headaches paying for legit stuff with Bitcoin, compared to paying for it with paypal, debit card, etc.

Please point me to the part where I mentioned price and then point me to the part in your post that isn't just your opinion, man.

if you mean infiltrated by a corporate takeover called Blockstream, i've been saying that for 2 years. 

Yes, that's exactly what I mean.

People, please start using a Bitcoin Classic or Unlimited node instead of Bitcoin-core because by doing this you are voting against the activation of SegWit even if you're not a miner. SegWit is the single most dangerous proposal to the Bitcoin network we have ever had.

then we can not have any hard fork or split, because without the 75% or 90% you will not have any new chain active, but we will remian on the current one

if 50% go to BU for example, they would mine an altcoin with no value, the main "core" chain will remain the one active with merchants and everything as it is now

ACTUAL EXPERT: Segwit is enough, activate and shut the fuck up you low IQ trolls

https://s2.postimg.org/e7xn5qkll/andreas.png

Time to wake up and smell the coffee. BUcoin is dead, get the best devs or die like the rest.

au contraire, BTU is a chinese takeover instigated by PBOC and, maybe, their "politburo" apparatchiks.
It has to be stopped or fork off in peace to trade their altcoin.