OP is likely just jealous because most mixers don't bother supporting their worthless forkcoin.  You know, the one that likes to pretend it's compliant with regulatory bodies when it actually isn't.  


For someone who vocally supports one of the shadiest criminals on the face of the planet, you're not really in a position to take the moral high-ground here.  

We should keep things in perspective, though.  There is a small element of truth to the statement that Bitcoin cannot replace the banks.  At least not fully.  Bitcoin isn't debt-based and debt-based systems are ideal for things like mortgages and other sizeable loans.  I suspect that's an area where traditional finance is always going to find a natural advantage.

Yeah, that's actually a good point.  I now wish I'd said it, heh.  Some people wrongly seem to assume satoshi is some sort of performing monkey who can be summoned to do a little stage show.  It definitely doesn't work like that.  The information we've already been given is ample.  There's no need to ask for more.

I'm still not convinced of that.  It's not necessarily accurate to say that a UASF can't be contentious.  I'm of the view that any time one "side" is trying to force the hand of another "side", then it's contentious.  Bitcoin depends on users, devs and miners working in unison.  Power struggles aren't conducive to that aim.

Grammatical vagaries are problematic, heh.  My usage of they/them is only in regard to not knowing their preferred personal pronouns.  For what it's worth, I get the impression satoshi was an individual.  I'm reasonably certain every post made by satoshi on this forum and the cryptography mailing list were made by the same person.



It's always difficult to judge intent.  We can only speculate on that. 

I don't think they're taking requests right now.   

If they haven't made an appearance for the last decade, it's fair to assume you're not going to hear any speeches from them any time soon.  If ever.

Let's pretend for a second that the US Government were completely insane and tried to do what you described.  It's hardly going to be a "backed" currency if they're constantly printing a greater number of dollars whilst at the same time dividing the number of bitcoins they're "backing" them with into smaller and smaller fractions.  Your entire premise is utterly moronic.  It would only serve to draw more attention to the fact that the value of the currency is constantly diminishing.  But please, keep arguing semantics about how fractions of a whole are magically greater than the whole.


//EDIT:


The whole point was that I'm not worried about them.  Your ridiculous scenario about the US was entirely lacking in logic, just like every other post you've ever made.  You couldn't make a valid point if your life depended on it.

But why?  Faketoshi is always desperate to be perceived as someone who has been a significant part of Bitcoin's history.  But so far, all he's proven is that he's an absolute nobody and doesn't matter in the slightest.  Prior to emergence of all the forkcoins, there's no evidence to show he has contributed to any of Bitcoin's major events.  Why would Gox be any different to all the other lies he's told?  It's just one fabrication after another.  Never anything of substance to back it up.

They'd have to identify everyone first.  If they still haven't caught all the people engaged in illegal peer-to-peer filesharing and copyright infringement, what chance do you think they have of catching all users of Bitcoin?  They might catch a few and make an example of them, but they can't stop it completely.



FTFY

More pieces does not mean a larger quantity.  Were you educated at all?

If you can't understand your own simple math or what the quotients of your rudimentary formulae represent, then maybe you should go back to school (unless, of course, you are in fact a schoolkid of below-average intelligence, in which case you need to try harder in class).

Physical gold is far easier to seize than something like a seed phrase when employing encryption to its full potential.  I could disguise my private keys within images or other media and send them to any corner of the planet I choose.  Anyone who has had their BTC confiscated simply wasn't taking all the precautions they could have taken.



It is already well established that division does not create more of something.  If you believe you can prove otherwise, please do us all a favour and cut yourself in half.

I've seen you make some stupid posts before, but this one truly is special.  You really must be running out of arguments if this is the straw you're clutching at.  The infinitesimally small chance of this happening aside, there will never be enough bitcoins to back all the money they keep printing.

That's skipping a few steps, though.  First the court has to establish jurisdiction to see if any rulings could feasibly be enforced.  Good luck with that.

Then, Faketoshi would have to convince the court the coins are actually his.  He doesn't have a particularly strong track record of winning the court's favour with his conduct and total lack of credible evidence.  Again, good luck there.

My guess is that he's totally reliant on the threat of litigation.  He just wants everyone to cave in to his silly demands.  He doesn't have a case.

It's not that clever.  A considerable portion of the value proposition of Bitcoin is that no one can seize your funds.  In the event it could be proven it's possible for people to file frivolous lawsuits and subsequently be awarded coins that don't belong to them, it would completely annihilate that value proposition.  The coins he would obtain in such an event would be worth very little after vast swathes of people abandon crypto for good and the entire crypto ecosystem goes into freefall.  Which is precisely why it's never going to happen. 

Maybe he'll bag the BSV coins and effectively kill his own shitcoin.  That's at least somewhat plausible.  In fact, fingers crossed on that outcome.  I'd love to witness the mass-uglycry when all the faketoshi fanboys get rekt by their own messiah.

My understanding is that he's doing that, too.  BTC, BCH and BSV are all included in his legal shenanigans.  He seemingly wants the coins on all forks.  Even though he is the figurehead for BSV, I'd honestly doubt that even the BSV devs would go along with this.  It would destroy any shred of credibility that chain had remaining.  And I'd estimate there's zero chance BTC or BCH devs will give in to his demands.

It's honestly a stretch to see where faketoshi takes it from here.  I can't imagine how you'd escalate things any further from this point.  Fingers crossed this is his "last hurrah" and after this he has exhausted all other avenues and finally gives up.

But surely, if it was "extremely inefficient", it wouldn't need "curtailing"?  I mean... which is it?   

Think of it this way:

Parachutes generally don't crash planes.  Life rafts generally don't sink ships.  They're simply a means to escape the scene of the accident in relative safely.  Bitcoin is a bit like that, except not just for emergencies.  You can use it outside of a crisis too.

That said, depending on your stance, you could technically argue that the global financial crisis has been ongoing since 2007 and has shown no signs of abatement.  Maybe it's fair to say no one has ever used Bitcoin outside of an emergency?   

Looks more like an own-goal to me.  By resorting to this desperate act, Faketoshi is proving beyond doubt they are nothing like satoshi.  These are not the actions of someone who respects a decentralised system where no one is in a position to "restore" (LOL) access like this.

Never?  Are you some sort of puritanical zealot?  Your unqualified use of absolute statements is adorable, but misguided.  Any form of transferable value can be useful for people looking to break the law.  If I've met people who have used Bitcoin for buying recreational substances on the darkweb, then your argument must be false.  You're living in a dream world if you think no one has ever done that. 



Oh right, I remember now, you're one of those faketoshi-worshipping forkcoiners.  Best of luck with your feeble attempts to spread Craig Scammer Wright propaganda.



It neither allows nor disallows criminal behaviour.  It remains neutral.  You can't ascribe morality to it, despite your best efforts.

What, that's it?  Nothing to support your assertion?  To say it sounds pretty thin would be an understatement.  I'd expect a correction after such an impressive bull run, sure, but where is this 50+% figure plucked from?

I don't know about priceless, but "big data" is probably still a bigger industry than crypto, yep.

Annoyingly, it's also one that people are generally less fearful of than they are about crypto, even though big data is arguably far more hazardous to their daily lives right now.  People talk about the dangers of market manipulation when it comes to crypto, but hardly anyone wants to talk about the dangers of social engineering and all these companies that are harvesting everyone's information and selling it on.