over population is not the problem
its only offring services to a small dense area (towns and cities) that make people congregate towards these area's to make it fel like its over crowded

we see it even in fully dveloped countries.
schools and hospitals appear cover crowded. not due to a national growth of population, but a constraining of rsourcs to particular area's

such as creating 'food deserts' by shutting down local stores and using only malls. makes people who cant afford to drive miles to a mall, unable to get a good variety of healthy foods

schools shutting down makes the students numbers per class of the remaining schools increase, without there being a massive birthrate/immigration rate from other nations

in the UK in the last 20 years the number of hospital beds have halved. it used to be 300k now its under 150k beds.. thus making it appear as overcrowding by having patients in corridors instead of wards.
but the reality is restraining the resources. not population numbers

(i understand your sentiment was comedic)
but them dirt paths you follow that have been constant year after year, caused by just low population of a few ramblers walking the same strict route. as most other human population use roads instead

now imagine a field being used like a music festival routinely,trampled on randomly with no obvious care for direction or route


because after all cows dont the intellect to drive cars to just stick to roads or enough intellect to stick to paths
its why farmers doing organic grass feed free range farming have to section off fields and herd cows to new sections every fortnight in cycles of a couple months


to then.. human organised reseed .. the first patch and give it time to regrow over that 6week recovery time before letting the cattle back on that section

imagine if farmers didnt do that and just let cows bred naturally by not separating the bull from the cows, and not sectioning off area's to give it a chance to regrow. nor reseed the land after the cows move to new area's

if you cant provide a signed message then no 'published' story can prove anything, it just gets categorised as fan-fiction

however show the signed message¹ then you will have some cred' to then make your story² worth reading and eventually deciding if the name of the person³ is worth revealing

no signed message = stage 2 and 3 are full of bull

before revealing the unknown identity..
prove it by showing a signed message

in essence show how you found him and how you prove it was him, before revealing him

if you can't or wont. them you are no better than others who just want 15 minutes of fame

the block data, after so many confirmations becomes increasingly difficult to erase the past. but orphaned blocks and double spends have occured. thus trusting zero-low confirms should not just be done on faith.
because history has shown that it is possible


people should always doubt and be critical, and be reviewing code and finding bugs constantly. because as soon as people just become complacent and just have trust/faith. thats when bad things happen
your trying to turn the risk of developer centralisation to be about private key personal loss/forgetfulness. just shows the sentiment is still trying to sway away and be vague/ignorant of the real issues.

private keys is not the network security risk. the coins are distributed not centrally hoarded. but the RULES decisions are centralised to one group

the sentiment tries to sway developer risk to network away from talking about developer risk by trying too get people to worry about PR guys that dont code, worry about pools that cant change the rules, worry about private key and individuals stupidity. but still not grasping the networks real risk that people should be critical of is the developers.
we should be critical of developers not 'trusting' of developers

his personal goal aint about crypto. its about not being charged with FIAT related crimes such as the australian tax scam and the fiat ponzi investments he done all linked to the 'tullp' trust scam that has no real collateral.
he keeps thinking ifhe can even sway a small percentage to think he has collateral in the tulip trust, he is safe from being charged 'beyond a reasonable doubt' simply by having doubt

but by not naming and shaming him. the only version of events people see are his side. thus he wins more

he doesnt write code. he gets others to write it for him
he is just a media drama queen
but there are still actual issues with the btc infrastructure.
and its then becoming a push the real issues of btc into just words from a drama queen to then say its just trolling to then hide the issues and avoid discussing the actual issues.

EG
imagine there was issue A
and some drama queen said there was issue B that they will announce in a year. by not announcing issue B people then laugh it off and pretend btc not only doesnt have issue B, if if it did its just a troll. but also that btc must be perfect and so not even think that there may be an issue A

i would say thes categories are very much in question and written in a vague manner to hide the risks to the categories

the DISTRIBUTION of the data and private keys makes it difficult to cheat the system of funds. as people dont/shouldnt share private keys
but the CENTRALISATION of the coding decisions by one central group makes it easy to cheat the rules and change the rules the network follow
and yes all 'indpendant' nodes do FOLLOW one set of rules. there are not independant rules each person has that are diverse
and yes the rules are decided by a central group not the independant network. due to some of the backdoors added in 2015-2017 that made it possible

windfury categorised the 'anti-blockstream/core power house' people as bsv fans.. his troll
windfury brought up the word bilateral split first
windfury then tried again pidgeon holing those that oppose core centralisation as CSW/ver fangirls



enjoy wanting just one central team running a networks rule decision making.
if only you could put aside the mindset that core centralisation and bypassing opposition as a good thing. and instead see what a true decentralised network of old btc had and should have, meaning no central 'reference'

btc is a core distributed network, not a diverse decentralised network. distributed not the same as decentralised
even windfury says it, though he hasnt really got the technical ability to realise what he is saying, when he promotes stuff like the UASF to realise what it actually does. uasf didnt even technically need user assistance. it was just a fake buzzword acronym that was used to set a mandated opposition cut-off

have a good day

P.S i have never used bch or bsv. i am critical of cores over reach because i care about btc(many should be critical and not just sheep to core)

though CW is just a bag of hot air and has no part in the btc network.

the segwit thing is not about improving the btc network for the betterment of diverse users wanting more transaction throughput on the btc network.(2 years on of segwit, yet btc has not surpassed the 600k tx a day threshold that was mentioned nearly a decade ago)

but instead using segwit features to push people off the btc network and into alternate networks. (such as LN, such as pegged sidechains, such as creating altcoins to fork off any opposition to core)
thus not only removing utility of the btc network by making people use alternative networks instead, but also centralising the btc network to only one group that become a central power of new rule decision making, by not requiring majority vote of diverse users to activate features.

to the standard scripted cor fangirl trolls
i am a user of btc, i have never used or touched the bch/bsv forks.
i am critical of cores overreach and power and control. as should anyone that wants a true decentralised network of real user utility
so dont categorise me as a altcoin fan. yes i detest core. but core should not be the center of btc. no one should. but if people want to pretend i must be some altcoin fan because i detest core. it just proves they want/love core centralising the network and calling it theirs, while pushing those that dont like core off the network

windfury as usual poked the bear first.
its the usual crowd of core fangirls that trigger it.

but as for this topic of CSW.. he isnt even a btc topic. he is an altcoin topic. CSW has no power over btc
so bringing him up as a btc topic but wanting to avoid and ignore something that is btc related. and pretend it never happened is  more like the centralists who are trolling

people can call me as many names as they like but all they are doing is showing how centralist they are. its like people calling out trumps failures and how he rigged elections to get in power, and all the trump fans want the public to do is only look and talk about hillary(CSW analogy), who is not even in power and to believe trump is the good guy even though many can see he is a over power reaching creep

once you start to tell people to stop criticising those in power and only criticise those that have no power. you know the politics of a system is screwed up. we should all be critical of core, not follow them like a religion

making and establishiing a crypto is easy.
sustaining a need for it is hard

most crapcoins are not actualy solving a real world problem but just made as a proof of concept to show how something can be done

for instance there are crapcoins that show how mining can be done via hard drive size proofs. yet the currency itself after the mining concept cant be usd to buy a doughnut because no merchants use it in exchange for their doughnuts

for instance there are crapcoins that show how 'medical records' can be logged and made immutable to be a proof of concept that medical records can be made secure. however no national/local medical infrastructure uses it themselves and wont for the simple fact that the creators of that blockchain never even bothered to get it implemented within the medical infrastructure

the reason people hate taxes is not that there are taxes but that the taxes are not seen as helping th public directly

for instance.
the amount of funds that go to pay for military, but the only time people see military within a country border, is during the soldiers vacation. the rest of the time they are abroad helping out defend other countries

the amount of funds that go to pay 'foreign aid' and banks, but while that enriches other countries and the already rich, the local population still see homeless people and people needing foodbanks just to survive

the strange thing is that laws can be made to make banks whole again. such as putting banks into a new policy of how they operate and have the debt written off, rather than paying banks for their own greedy acts that got them in debt

so instead of avoiding being involved and avoiding paying taxes under the illusion that it helps reach the political goals you wish to se in politics.. people should be using their vote. where by if the current political options dont have the philosophy you wish, you help form a new political party that wants to for instance, put the treasury funds into a 'local public funding first' philosophy, and change banking policy to be more consumer protection rather than corporate protection


having the mindset of 'if you dont like the new policy just f**k off' doesnt stop the policy. instead it lets the new policy be created even easier because the opposition has been removed

1. try quitting bing a citizen and your treated like a migrant. enjoy living in the detention centre until they can find which country you are a citizen of to deport you to

2. though there are UN human rights. dont believe you would be protected by a countries civil rights, as again you wont b a citizen

3. yes civil rights do come with responsibilities and many people think they are harsh and some think the 'club rules' are like being a slave. but the truth is having no civil rights is definetly enslavement

4. trying to revoke your citizenship is not showing anyone that you have power instead its you not voting thus you dont get a count thus you become non-important to politics as you have zero sway.

5. but voting. if you can get enough people like minded can change things.

its like bitcoin consensus. (as it was prior to 2017) things dont change unless majority vote for it. no vote=no change.
but you seem to want to advocate that everyone should not vote. thus leaving the only voters that do vote to be the ones who want tyranny(like bitcoin august 2017)
and now we are in a bitcoin situation of one rule making group who wont let anyone take the power over because they no longer count the vote of opposing views. instead they just deport the opposition
sounds like tyranny to me

you will be glad to know you still dont have to agree with badecker. because not everything grows back each spring
especially if its been trampled over..

what badecker and most people think is that land heals itself no matter if its unused or over used. spouting out how grass seeds can regrow in just 6 weeks.
however. that involves maintaining the land to not be over used or having to re-seed the land

hints: why do farmers even need to buy grass seed, why do people need to water their lawns and land


research: land degradation

i know i have in some post described how things are. but they are not working and some prisons dont have some of the luxuries nor the hefty penalties which you describe as the heaven or hell 2 sides of prison. so my topic was about if things were to change.. how and in what way.

for instance if someone finishing their 2 year sentance. is not just put on the street with just a taxi fare. but actually spending the final 6 months actually sorting themselves out with a job.

for instance there are many 'public sector' jobs that are low grade (cleaning public toilets, community gardens) which could be dedicated to ex-cons thus ensuring a better chance of retaining a job and 'starting a new life' compared to circumstances before incarceration.

re-offending for small things like stealing foed usually happens because when released all they have is a taxi fare and a criminal record meaning they can go months without a steady income(thus needing to steal to survive again) while trying to plead to private businesses to give them a chance. however if they have a job at release. (as a condition of being released) then the re-offending rate goes down. and they can use the fact that they have a job, as a means of showing future next employers they have some potential and some experience to move up and into better employment

you are so flip floppy..
you dont opt-in via softfork consensus bypass..
your just no longer having the opportunity to have an OPT whether in or out.
EG tyranny instead of consent

it used to be features did not activate unless majority consent is reached of a multibrand single network. now its just follow cores desires or find another network.
people dont get the oppertunity to stop a bug from being added or a feature that could ruin bitcoin be added.
but hey 'its core' so you just want them to do as they please unhindered, and let the community be slave s to cores decisions.

thats what you keep salivating about and love about how bitcoin has changed over the last couple years. the recent non requirement of consensus

but have a good day.

we are two different people. but yes it is repetative monotonous droning as for 2 years now doomad has been repeating the same scripts and i have to keep reminding readers of stuff that is not core centric favouring.

doomad just leaves it a couple weeks and then repeats the bear poking via windfury restarting it.
its far more likely that windfury and doomad are the same person. where windfury strikes the first poke and then awakens the bear then uses the doomad name to come to the defence

their strategy is not original or new hence why it seems monotonous

consensus is about consent
CORE NODES didnt need to give consent to activate segwit because of the bypass trick of not needing to consent/opt-in that they implemented way way earlier. aka 'the backward compatibility'

but the NETWORK did need consent by nodes that were not backward, compatible.
hense why they didnt get their november-december 2016 activation

however core, before getting fair high majority network consent from all node brands to activate segwit, core pushed the opposition off the network. thus not needing their consent by just not counting the opposition TO FAKE CONSENSUS

even when you flip flop you admit your love for the idea of not needing consent anymore
you absolutely nearly orgasm that core can activate stuff 'soft' by not needing consent

look at you above talking about the network NOW not needing consent, because everything can be done soft NOW
but what you fail to realise is the network NOW is not what bitcoin WAS
your trying to deny the past where satoshi solved the byzantine generals issue

you even talk about the stuff such as how you admire how luke JR announced the way to slip things in without network consent. which just proves when your not flip flopping how you actually know that consensus has changed and become not required in recent years

you whole heartedly keep on trying to sway history into cores favour.
and that is your failure.
you care more about cores control than having an actual decentralised network

and dont even try to twist the word core distributed nodes to be the same as decentralised. as its not the same thing.

but dont bother replying as this has just been the same rebuttals every time because your scripts dont change. your favour to core is very loud, and i feel gmax should just get it over with and give you a hug already as it seems its what you want and need from him.

maybe one day your scripts will change. and i dont mean another flip flop. i mean one day you will actually realise bitcoin is more then core. and you favouring core as the sole 'reference' has been your failure

and more of a failure how you know all this but aftr a week or two you somehow pretend to have amnesia and revert back to the same scripts of core favour and pretend your version of history is right.. even though blockchain data and cod itself can disprove your version

anyway have a nice day.

exercise can be a positive in the form of a temporary escape/change of environment. EG getting out the house stops you starring at the same 4 walls. fresh air is better then stale dusty house air. and exercise gets your blood pumping.

but its just temporary.. much like eating an icecream or coffee can be.

exercise shouldnt be treated as a cure for depressions or a replacement for therapy/medication. it should be something that goes alongside other treatments.

therapy for instance is not just sat down with a therapist talking about daddy/mummy issues when you were a kid. but can b cognative therapy such as teaching your brain how to manage things. such as setting an alarm to get into a routine to gt you out of bed in the morning instead of staying in bed all day. setting a schedule or writing things down if your forgetful and get stressed by missing appointments or forgetting to do something.
stuff like handling grief like learning that you will never forget the person you lost but that doesnt man you have to constantly think about them to remember. you can writ things down like positive memories and experiences with them that way you can just refer to your journal once a week/month year instead of thinking about then every minute of every day worried you'll forget that memory if you dont.

if your in a abusive relationship, there are ways to learn to become more confident and learn how to stand up for yourself, even just verbally, without causing conflict, until your confident enough to end the relationship

even stuff like joining community 'coffee mornings' and cooking classes to get you out the house and try new hobbies and meet new people.

or more simply avoid watching the news and negative documentaries and instead just watch the comedy channel and music channels to change the mood of your entertainment

i say al this because i have seen recently in my area how the actual mental services has declined and all people are given is advice to go for a walk around a park or handed a leaflet on some basic yoga poses. and this is in a country that meant to offer free medical care, not offering anything medical unless pretty much suicidal, by which it jut ends up bing locked up in a psychiatric facility