Bitcoin Forum

As we all know cobra-bitcoin after some years in dark site the last months start to be active in twitter and reddit. For what he post there raise the warning that his account was compromised. Some says that the old owner of his account sell it.
The last post that he openly support bcash is another proof that his account is compromised

https://twitter.com/CobraBitcoin/status/970736614275153926


for that reason imo bitcoin.org is not a safe bitcoin site anymore and that has compromised too.

Sorry but I didn't know who is this Cobra-bitcoin in the Bitcoin scene or here in the forum as I only knew Theymos, Cyrus, hilariousandco and some other.
Is he really the owner of Bitcointalk.org? what's his username here though?

I'm pretty sure JihanWU support Bcash too so It make no sense If we take his last tweet in consideration where he is against Bitmain/Jihan WU. As for the site, theymos would've told us If that was the case as I believe he is in control of bitcoin.org as well.

just because someone is supporting bitcoin cash it doesn't mean their accounts are compromised. they may have their  reasons for doing such things, maybe he wants it to get pumped so he can dump a large amount and make a shitload of money LOL.

but jokes aside bitcoin.org being compromised or not is a meaningless and dumb thing. bitcoin.org is just a website like any other website. people should never put too much trust in anything that is centralized. and bitcoin.org is centralized.

things people have to know are these:
source code: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/
how to verify authenticity of the binaries for bitcoin core: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1588906.0

Are we thinking the accounts were compromised before or after calling for this radical and reactionary Bitcoin hardfork (https://medium.com/@CobraBitcoin/an-open-letter-to-the-bitcoin-community-to-change-the-proof-of-work-algorithm-12a6545c20d0)?  If anything, splitting the current Bitcoin blockchain in such a contentious and ill-conceived fashion would only be of benefit to competing chains.  It's not like this is the first time they've said something controversial.  They also had some "interesting" ideas about the original whitepaper being rewritten.  Is this more likely just a simple case of some things being said without thinking it through to conclusion?  Is there even a chance they've reconsidered their priorities and had a genuine change of heart?

I mean, sure, Cobra may have an agenda, or perhaps his twitter account was compromised, but tbh that single tweet doesn't provide enough information or even an specific reason to believe that Bitcoin.org isn't safe. Also, Cobra isn't the only co-owner of Bitcoin.org, Theymos is the other co-owner (as listed in the site: https://bitcoin.org/en/about-us#owners), so I don't think Cobra has full control over the site.

He is not referring to this forum website but the actual bitcoin website (this is the chat forum and is (or was) owned by satoshi, now administered by theymos). If c0bra is down then they need someone else to hold rights to the domain. Too many eggs in one basket otherwise

I think it's not likely that account of Cobra was compromised just because that he started to support Bitcoin Cash.
And Bitcoin.org is still safe, because Cobra don't have full control of this website, he have same power as theymos.
I think it wouldn't be a meaningless thing. Newbies who looking for information about Bitcoin are usually searching for *official* website of Bitcoin. Bitcoin.com owned by Roger Ver already become official website of Bcash, what if same thing would happen to Bitcoin.org? It's centralized website, but at least it gives correct information, not like Bitcoin.com.

has not any sense in 5 months to publicly say that Bcash fork is an attack to bitcoin, then to promote a pow change to get the power from chinese miners and after that to say that you believe that ln will fail and the only solution is bcash... :P
And why bcash and not litecoin or any other shitcoin out there? What has bcash that has not any other shitcoin? Roger Ver, Craig Wright and Jihan Wu? And why bitcoin will fail if ln fail?
Whatever he says this guy has not any sense. Cobra-bitcoin was dark and anonymous for years. Finally before 8 months he start to tweet and to be active to social media.
I believe that his account is compromised and that the real cobra is pwnd or arrest or hacked or whatever.
I really dont care what Cobra or anyone believes. There are plenty of ppl that believes to shitcoins.
The real problem here is that this guy is an admin to bitcoin.org. If he is compromised then there is a great risk to this site.

that twitter account is only 6 months old... i smell phish

but then again cobra wanted to rewrite satoshi's whitepaper and still call it satoshi's paper.. so i think he has always had a few brain cells short of a braincell

bitcoin.com is a roger ver's bcash propaganda site. Bitcoin twitter account has pwnd from Roger Ver the previous owner sell it to him. Everyone can imagine what will happen if and bitcoin.org will fail. This site  is to satoshi white paper.

I for one don`t see his logic calling POW change on bitcoin to kill jihan centralization and in next day or so, promoting bcash...
Must be some  ::)  :o

This. Cobra has never been a significant contributor to Bitcoin.org. He's just leveraging his reputation as "co-owner" to make himself seem important. As David Harding points out (https://twitter.com/hrdng):


I believe Cobra has been using Jihan Wu and the issue of mining centralization as red herrings. The intent is to divide the Bitcoin community against itself. Inevitably, a hard fork change to the proof-of-work algorithm (with significant support) will cause a permanent, sustained network split. Who benefits? Jihan Wu, Bitmain and Bcash.

Last thing Bitcoin needs is another fork.

So, maybe, Roger Ver is behind and/or has a hand on this news publication, The Curious Case of ‘Cobra Bitcoin’: The Peculiar Anon with a Lot of Power (https://news.bitcoin.com/the-curious-case-of-cobra-bitcoin-the-peculiar-anon-with-a-lot-of-power/?utm_source=OneSignal%20Push&utm_medium=notification&utm_campaign=Push%20Notifications) if it's affirmative don't get what he's up to as Theymos was mentioned...

"There are a few characters within the bitcoin space who are anonymous but have enormous amounts of control over certain aspects within the bitcoin space. For instance, there is Theymos, the co-owner of Bitcoin.org, and Bitcointalk who helps operate those sites with Cobra Bitcoin. (Theymos also controls r/bitcoin and the bitcoin wiki page). Cobra was first introduced in a Github update over three years ago as the co-owner of Bitcoin.org alongside Theymos. Since then his commentary and Bitcoin.org Github requests have been very contentious."

as much as I hate bitcoin cash and I believe it is an attack on bitcoin, but I hate it even more when people call everyone that talks about it as "shills, compromised,..." and the worst part is that whenever someone is fucking with bitcoin and even puts it in danger everyone is dead silent.
the same person was trying to literary rewrite history by replacing Satoshi's white paper with a new one. and he is also pushing for a change in mining algorithm which is something that others including bitcoin core devs like LukeJr have been pushing for too.

But then Theymos has to come out and declare the "Cobra" Twitter account is not really Cobra, right?

But it's possible. The @Bitcoin Twitter account was also possibly bought and controlled by Roger Ver. It has been making tweets about Bitcoin Cash being the real Bitcoin because "Satoshi's Vision".

i neither have a problem for anyone to choose whatever shitcoin he want and to promote it even this crap bcash. But i have a problem if this person that do this is the admin of historical site like bitcoin.org. This kind of site need really bitcoin believers and not ppl that promote shitcoins like bcash that is controlled by a bunch of scammers with their only propose to hijack the name and destroy bitcoin.
Imo cobra-bitcoin must remove asap from bitcoin.org or step down. Then he can continue to promote whatever he like as bcash, dollar, banks, IMF or whatever he like. Who cares.

According to the following cobra is joint owner along with theymos:

https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/blob/master/_templates/about-us.html

and is getting worse. a new tweet today


https://twitter.com/CobraBitcoin/status/971365176774680576

this account is very clear that is a Jihan Wu propaganda tool. Why Theymos has not say anything about this situation? Cobra must step down from bitcoin.org or removed.

Or maybe we could just try being adults about it and not be completely intolerant to different opinions.  Seems much easier than making a big deal out of it, not to mention drawing more attention and publicity to the opinions you appear to be offended by.  You're free to disagree, by all means, but you absolutely don't get to dictate what happens to stuff that other people own.  That's kind of an important principle here in crypto.  If it doesn't belong to you, it's none of your business.

once again.. Who cares what cobra or anyone else believes. He is freely to support what he says. I really dont care. The problem is that the same person and i talk about cobra is the admin of bitcoin.org. Bcash supporters not only support their shitcoin but they have a great interest to  do whatever they can to destroy bitcoin. Who says that in the near future cobra not comprimise bitcoin.org with a malware or start to promote bcash as the "real" bitcoin and promote Craig Wright as the "real" Satoshi?
This is my problem dude. Not his opinion.

This is continue to getting better. His new answer to reddit discussion

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/82ofw9/cobrabitcoin_must_step_down_asap_from_bitcoinorg/dvbn3l0/


yeah until now crypto world has not a tech miracle like bcash :P and after that he says :D


this is what says every day Roger Ver, Jihan Wu and Craig Wright. Is liek to copy paste them. Are we sure that the old cobra owner of the account has not sell it? Is very suspicious that cobra-bitcoin get out from silence after so many years and the last 8 months begin to promote all of this.
Even dogecoin has more txs from bcash and every tech guy understand what centralisation will bring node of 20k $ as Craig Wright says.

Something fucked up is happening here. A few days ago he was whining about changing the proof of work algorithm to save bitcoin from the miners. Now he's full bcash which is 100% the pet of those evil centralisers.

It makes sense if you consider that a contentious hardfork which could potentially divide the Bitcoin community in half would be incredibly beneficial to BCH, because it would create further confusion about which Bitcoin is the "real" one.  Regardless of what the "noble cause" is purported to be, more disruption and infighting is categorically not the way forward.  I, for one, don't buy this notion that we need to "save Bitcoin from the miners" with the nuclear option of an algorithm change.  It's a pretty flimsy pretense for making an enormous mess and, personally, I don't believe it to be sincere.  

---

It doesn't matter what you think the problem is.  Nor does it matter how dangerous he might be in your paranoid fanboy delusions.  It wouldn't even matter if he was under the direct influence of whatever boogeyman you're soiling yourself over at any given point in time.  That's all completely 100% irrelevant.  The point, which you seem utterly incapable of grasping, is you are in literally no position to say he can't own something that already belongs to him.

If you can't respect the basic concept of ownership, what are you even doing here?

You said:

No.  False.  Cobra "must" do nothing of the sort.  Get over yourself.  

You also said:

No.  False again.  Having partial ownership of a domain name does not preclude Cobra from discussing topics you personally find undesirable.  Again, get over yourself.

Aside from that, I like how anyone who gives the slightest hint of legitimacy to BCH is automatically assumed to be the equivalent of a cyber-terrorist who is being mind controlled by Jihan or Roger.  It's good that you're being reasonable about these things and not resorting to grossly exaggerated caricatures.   ::)  

How do fruitloops like you even function on a day-to-day basis?  I honestly do wonder sometimes.

no offense but i wonder the same for you with the kumbaya view of things. You mean that we must be happy that roger ver, craig wright and now cobra attack bitcoin and promote bcash because it will made it "stronger" :P ?
ok.... :P
is like someone to slap your face and not react because you expect to get stronger :D

makes me laugh

person doesnt follow the blockstream roadmap like a bible.. so chek2fire says take away control of website and give it solely to blockstream fanboys... all because of a twitter account.
where said twitter account might be a spoof anyway

thats like saying you want a divorse because you seen a fresh pair of boxers in your wifes bed.. before even asking who's boxers they were.. maybe she likes wearing boxers herself but doesnt want to wear yours because she knows where they have been.. maybe she bought you a fresh pair because she knows where your old ones have been.

but hey deep down people soon realise what you really wanted was any excuse to not have to share the bed with anyone that opposes your opinion
..
chek2fire bitcoin WAS suppose to be decentralised. but instead of having the whole x1 x2 as a single network consensus..
(like unlimited, xt, classic was 2014-2016)
 blockstreamers baracaded themselves into a cabin and then got bloq to help push x2 into altcoin land so that blockstreams x1 got activated even though x1 was only getting 30% of the community node vote prior to their game

by saying anything not core is an attack is the simple admission that you believe core own bitcoin. and thus you admit that bitcoin is not decentralised.

..

while i do love seeing blockstream fanboys blaming others to distract the attention away from how bitcoin is losing its ethos because of blockstream fanboyerism.. all they are really doing is just pushing people away unless they are part of a roadmapped central agenda

what should have happened is that if blockstream didnt get the 2015 segwit vote and then didnt get the consensus vote. blockstream(core) should have gave up and listened to the community by trying something else. but instead they banished the opposition into altcoin land to 'rig' the vote in blockstreams roadmaps favour

but hey now they can push as many soft forks as they like without a vote. so thats why some are saying full nodes are no longer required. because its all gone centralised..

but hey. as long as you can make people look in the other direction while bitcoins utility diminishes further.. you will be happy right

You don't have to like it.  But at the same time, you have to recognise that calling upon someone in a position of authority to take action and forcibly remove someone you perceive as a threat is wholly antithetical to the ideals you supposedly subscribe to as a Bitcoin user.  As is trying to orchestrate a witch-hunt complete with pitchforks and burning torches to take their ownership away by coercion.  That's not how we do shit here.  You can't "win" by abandoning the fundamental principles that guide us.  

Maybe just use your words and make a compelling case as to why Cobra is wrong to say what they're saying.  Then allow people to decide for themselves which one the correct view is.  You know, like a civilised human being.  Is it really that difficult?  

All this bandwagon/populist crap is just stirring up unnecessary drama.  If anything, you're hurting your own cause by provoking extreme reactions to what are actually pretty trivial issues.  If people like you were more tolerant of differing views, there would be less division in the community overall and there may not even have been a split that people would feel the urge or need to defend against.  

Or, to put it more succinctly, you have to accept responsibility for your own involvement in how BCH came to exist in the first place.

Think on that.

If he owns bitcoin.org it will be curious if he will ever redirect bitcoin.org to bcash.org or something similar, after that it will make a huge sense. Btw I agree to you, his account is compromised, bitmain wants to make bitcoin cash more wide and popular among people than bitcoin.

Well for me as long as the campaign is not a scam im ok with that, and bitcointalk dont have any fees or charge when you make an account so you should not be worried in loss of something but still bitcointalk.org is very helpful for me i hope that news is just not true...

the only time you should worry about bitcoin cash getting more wide spread, is not about twitter accounts or website links.. but when real world merchants stop accepting bitcoin and choose a different crypto.

and then instead of crying its a conspiracy/attack.. ask yourself what has bitcoin actually done to keep decentralisation and community openness alive.
so far since 2014 (the advent of core/blockstream) all i have seen is bitcoins ethos and utility slowly diminish

but hey.. go back a couple decades and go point fingers blaming a conspiracy that myspace failed because facebook spoofed some twitter account. instead of realising that myspace stagnated and failed to listen to its community, and thus the community decided something else was needed.

personally no one can pigeion hole me into any "camp" because my philosophy is decentralisation. not band camp preference.. and its more than likely that the merchant adopting crypto will be something more like litecoin or even a yet to be conceived coin, rather than any bitcoin fork, if blockstream continue with their roadmap

for what i understand you propose for all of us to have done a logical step down and accept the follow term to prevent the bcash fork.

1. That Craig Wright is Satoshi and that his proposal of big blocks, 20k nodes are the true satoshi vision
2. That Roger Ver is the most brilliant tech guy to bitcoin ecosystem and everything he says is very logical in tech terms
3. To accept the blackmail from Jihan Wu and the situation that miners has the most power to bitcoin ecosystem to cancel segwit activation for months and never UASF happens
4. To accept that the real rulers of Bitcoin ecosystem is miners and big companies and never fight back for segwit2x
5. To accept that every crap opinion has much more value that whet bitcoin engineers says.

and finally to accept now that Cobra, a silent account for years that get active the last months, is not compromised even when he promote things that has not sense.
No dude. Bitcoin ecosystem was not work like this and was not survive so many years with hippies and flowers.

chek2fire
take off your blockstream dev defense hat.. and instead of the band camp/defense attack rhetoric... argue about BITCOINS ethos and utility.
all people are trying to hint to you is that you care more about the blockstream devs having ultimate decision powers and no one else should

take a step back from the keyboard. make a cup of coffee and think long and hard about WHO/WHAT you are defending

i have already here a cup of coffee what is your point? And i never see as my friend scammers like CraigWright, Jihan Wu or Roger Ver.

craig wright is a scammer yes...
the whole jihan/ver drama is just a soap opera for reddit..
the cobra twitter is drama..

when it comes to what really matters to bitcoin, is what core/blockstream have done to diminish bitcoins ethos and utility..
if you want to continue the personality/band camp drama.. you will get your entertainment on reddit.

now sit back have a long think about what you are trying to argue about and realise where your arguments are failing.

this is what Maxwell says about this cobra compromised acccount


https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/82ofw9/cobrabitcoin_must_step_down_asap_from_bitcoinorg/dvcgmsb/

If I could facepalm any harder I'd likely knock myself unconscious.  No.  Funnily enough, none of that mindless drivel is what I'm proposing.

What I'm proposing is that the more you obsess about Wright/Ver/Wu/etc the more power you give them (https://media.giphy.com/media/l2Je2el4q8BEyYdq0/giphy.gif).

These personalities aren't important.  If you had even a fraction of sense you'd realise people only think they're important because you and all the other paranoid nut-jobs on this forum literally can't stop talking about them.  You're like their greatest PR consultant.  Keep giving them all that free publicity and making people think they're a big deal.  Or, better yet:

Shut.  Up.  About.  The.  Goddamn.  Boogeymen.  You.  Utter.  Cretin.

You and those like you continually reinforce and perpetuate the rift you helped create by focusing on egos, agendas and other such pathetic vanities that are in absolutely no way useful to the goal of further advancing a revolutionary technology.  People like you are directly culpable for creating an environment where this "Us vs Them" tribalist caveman mentality makes it impossible for anything but further splits and fractures.  Literally everything you are is far more damaging to Bitcoin than your chosen devils could ever be.

It's like you're trying to make a bad situation worse.  Kindly do Bitcoin a favour and just stop existing until you have a clue in your head.  Please. 

lol

A lot of popular Bitcoiners are calling him a "snake" now. This will not be good for the community if that Twitter account is really controlled by the real Cobra.

Well maybe it is. More drama! YES! That's what I'm here for. Hahaha.

Has someone sent a PM to Theymos yet, or are you all afraid to? Because I would be. Hahaha.


The plot thickens. I blame the CIA. Hahaha.

we have and more.... :P


https://twitter.com/CobraBitcoin/status/971561261661028352

any news from Theymos? I think anyone must avoid to use bitcoinl.org until the situation to shuttle down. Is not safe to use and especially to download bitcoin binaries from a site that the admin is an account that hacked and compromised.

And a reminder to anyone what this person says when his account was "hacked" :P

https://archive.fo/mrXQY

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXxD4QsXkAEe8WB.jpg

the sad is that this guy not even respect the thousand of hours that volunteers contribute to this site. He must step down from bitcoin.org asap.

I am torn in this issue. He did make sense about the POW change to prevent the mining cartel to rule over Bitcoin. I believe Luke Dashjr also expressed the same view.

https://medium.com/@CobraBitcoin/an-open-letter-to-the-bitcoin-community-to-change-the-proof-of-work-algorithm-12a6545c20d0


But going as far as calling Bitcoin Cash as the real Bitcoin, which is controlled by Jihan Wu and friends is very contradictory. Maybe he should propose to a POW change there as well. Hahaha.

But seriously, what changed? There has to be something happening behind all of this. Blackmail perhaps?

And exactly this is happening.

SW + LN + < 1MB  is too complex and too expensive to get  any new merchants on board - this was pretty much clear front up.

This looks so much Netscape + Altavista + Kodak, too much name calling and too much central egos....

https://blockchain.info/address/1Cobra3fJstD9g3DJ2oaUpDps5gJsZa4eS

LoL


send him some dust and try to get him back on track  ;D

The Lightning Network is not being marketed as a solution for merchants yet, while Segwit is now fully impelemented starting in version 0.16.0. Please explain to me how Segwit is "expensive and too complex for any new merchants".

SW is a very big code base change and this even to the base protocol level, injected into a about 8 year old very experimental and totally new, mostly unproven and incomprehended complex open tech env.

What would you expect, if you as a major or medium sized business are going to consult to professional risk managers (EY, Deloitte, PWC, ... Moodys, Standard & Poors, Fitch,.. insurance companies,... you name it) to let them figure out about whether it is more risky to choose for a robust, sustainable  impl for years (consider maintenance, road map, gov shit,..) between

 the very new SW protocol + moar complex road map (LN, 2nd Layer shit, nothing tested and ready soon)

or

BCH (= 8 y tested + little change to allow 8MB, but slow starting with <1MB in real = absolute ok, road map 32MB ... or 1GB ) ?

Or even

ETH, very young, not really scarce, Turing complete attack surface, scaling issues ^2 ...

At the risk of this turning into a BTC vs BCH vs ETH thread and which one is supposedly best, how about we just say that all are free to compete on the open market because that's how it was designed.  Each has its own strengths and weaknesses and none of them are perfect.  So rather than trying to preempt the market, it's probably best just to wait for it to decide for itself.  And, coming back to the topic at hand, whichever one you personally happen to like best doesn't preclude you from having dealings in any of the others, or owning any particular domain names.

Everyone is free to own what they own.  No one gets to take it away from them based on nothing more than an increasing petty and childish difference of opinion.  It's depressing that some people are incapable of moving past this puerile squabble.

Ultimately, the issue here isn't "who can be trusted to own a domain name?".  The issue is both "how do we, as mature and rational adults, not allow it to bother us when people in positions of influence hold differing views?" and "what if we stop putting them in positions of influence to begin with by not continuing to give them a wider audience than they otherwise deserve?".

It really doesn't have to be a big drama unless we choose to make it one.

If you really are going to consult with "professional risk managers" like those you mentioned, I believe using anything deeply technical to asses risk would go over all of their heads.

Instead, I want to ask you who the most qualified and the smartest people are in Bitcoin land and what, do you believe, will they say about Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash and Ethereum?

Well - no.

Look e.g. into Switzerland where lots of such companies / universities / FINMA are already up to date and also hire ppl for exclusively such tasks. Also some banks like Falcon, Frick, Swissquote, Vontoble  are full running business here- be assured they have gone through many of such processes here.

Look out of your box - bitcoin & co has reached much more brains you might see and ever are aware of.

Proper risk management is base task in fin industry - many things are turned out into very clear numbers and math.


Single ppl , as you might want to hear , have no exclusive say any more if it comes to this rigorous quant analysis.


Code / Protocol analysis for beginners:

Compare Line-Count (simplest measure for code complexity)  - to - feature / capacity achieved

High code complexity is mostly bad as every junior coder knows. ;)
(If there is simpler code out doing exactly the same or better than the more complex one, what code would you start with?)

Help:  Google for

it risk manager "blockchain"
 

I am still skeptical what people outside of Bitcoin really think about it. How do we know that they have an idea about cryptocurrencies in general?

Let this be a good example showing that they don't, http://moonnocoin.com/weissratings-sokuhou/Weiss-Cryptocurrency-Ratings.pdf

Plus most of them HATE Bitcoin and what it stands for because it threatens the domain of their masters.

you are just attacking SegWit and all that comes with it while hiding all the flaws in the other two which you mentioned here! which makes you comments here very biased and without any value.

lets see.
nothing about BCH is tested, the "8 y test" is the 1 MB blocks test not the 8 MB so that is the same. the flaws that will cause is that it makes running full nodes harder and harder by individuals in the long run if blocks become full not like so far with empty 100-200 kB blocks! and that leads to more centralization and eventually there can only be centralized master full nodes run by government agents instead of individuals all around the world and that kills bitcoin.

ETH is even worse! you can no longer start a full node, the sync is impossible at this point because how slow and HUGE the blockchain of it is. a simple surge of transactions can cripple the whole ETH network which will cripple not only ETH but also all the tokens that are based on it!
and worst but not last is the fact that ETH is centralized and ever since their roll back they proved it is not immutable either.

My 'bias' is just 'against' complexity here.

And technically, a no-SW Bitcoin Blockchain is tested for good over 8 years now.

BCH is practically running < 1MB atm so what is your point?   Sure - if big corps & masses decide this is less risky - so we are happy to see more here - that's how it works in growth phases - enough nodes will come with new players.

The 'everybody needs to run a full node' narrative just does not hold any more - we just need 'enough' - PoW and it's inherent external risks are pretty good aligned with decentralization pressure.

I think in that particular case they appear to know, or rather care, less than the average person in a coma about crypto. That was purely an attempt to milk subscriptions out of people.

They rated a coin that doesn't exist yet above hundreds that do.

I very much hopefully wish that Bitcoin Cash blocks become regularly full that its lone developer's only option is to increase the blocks once again via another hard fork that would risk another chain split.

Yes I said "lone" developer because there's really only one. Hahaha.

Plus what do you mean by "enough nodes". Most of them are run by Roger Ver and Jihan Wu using Alibaba cloud services.

Meanwhile Bitcoin has the smartest people working on it. But we are off the topic now. Back to Cobra.

Well, yes - let's do (anti-bitcoin style!) and concentrate on a single / central individual ( Cobra in this case) .. to betters split and bash  ?

no - that's not good  - and luckily there is more behind Bitcoin than some (only to you?) known 'lone'  - these are damned to fail / die anyway ( try to understand anti - fragile) .

you are free to believe what you want  - If things go for Satoshi's Bitcoin - I'm with you.

Bitcoin (Cash) has lots of perspectives - removing the max_block_size parameter from the consensus protocol level might be just the lowest hanging fruit here.

Since we seem to be drifting away from the original topic, I'll ask again if anyone can give a justifiable reason why someone should be coerced into surrendering ownership of their property based on nothing more than a difference of opinion.  I don't think there's any threat to the bitcoin.org website.  We're yet to hear from anyone else directly invloved in the project to say they see any threat.  Greg Maxwell replied but isn't calling for heads to roll.  So, the only threat I see is to liberty itself, perpetuated by the OP, who clearly believes a difference of opinion is sufficient to organise a lynch mob.  Apparently you only have permission to own a domain name if they personally agree with everything you say.  That's news to me.

You say that, but you also say


that.

Isn't saying that you would only follow "Satoshi's Bitcoin" also a centralization phrase? That is the worst kind of attitude to have in Bitcoin. It's the same with how the Ethereum community follows Vitalik Buterin unquestionably like a god.


That does not make it better.

Why does nobody really know how many Satoshi was ?
 ::) ??? ;)

IMHO this is Bitcoin > we should not care of single guys here, get the thing decentralized as much as the competition allows. I believe we need only a 'central' money for 'all', such hints to a central crypto ccy and yes - no space for ETH (maybe having a single guy there could be a reason for a failure?)  and other copies.  What computers and the internet can do, to serve these 'all' -> one perfect crypto should do and I fear BTC (++) has issues to achieve that - Cobra is one guy seeing this now and openly chats about + getting smacked.

Is that your argument? Really?


Then drop the argument about "we forked to bigger blocks because we are following Satoshi's vision". Satoshi is, in essence, only a single guy. A centralization figure.

But if you continue arguing for "Satoshi's vision", then I will argue that "Satoshi's vision" is for the Lightning Network.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834752.0

Freedom of choice

You make up your own mind, Cobra does, that's fine.

As long as it is about Bitcoin for the masses (un-banked inclusion) - fine with me ;)

Figure out how much complexity of the base protocol is 'ok' to reach these masses.

Oh it is "freedom of choice" now. I thought you were following Bitcoin Cash because of "Satoshi's vision". When you finally realized that you are following a centralization figure, you back away and call it "freedom of choice". How convenient. Hahaha.

I have no problem if you choose an altcoin like Bitcoin Cash, but do not call it the real Bitcoin. It's simply not.

and paypal, visa, mastercard is a "freedom of choice".... :P

For all the unbanked ?   - no