Then you are deluded. BTC's The SegWit Omnibus Changeset ... drove a huge percentage of Bitcoiners to greener pastures.
Now let's be fair Jbreher, I really don't think anyone is going to agree that the shitshow of bch and bchsv is "Greener Pastures" It's a big world out there. Perhaps you should get out from time to time. edit: patched quoting |
|
|
|
Just watch, we'll be stuck at 6502 soon enough.....
0x02; HCF |
|
|
|
The human condition is complete shit.
If that is your state of mind currently, taking hallucinogenics might not be the best choice of the substances that are available. All experience hath shewn that these be words of wisdom. |
|
|
|
I think he’s very likely to be a paid shill.
You can consider it likely if you want. But I am not paid for my advocacy of Bitcoins in any flavor, be it SV, BCH, or BTC. Meantime, half of y'all are whoring out your reputations to shill some crap product in y'all's sigs. Imagine the irony. I would never expect you to be a shill, I think they have you and most of the BCH community wrong. I just think you are all very ideological and wanting Bitcoin to be a digital cash and see no use of anything not directly on the blockchain. No second layer no whatnot, I don't have any issue with second layer innovation, per se. What galls me is that Blockstream and the rest of Core deliberately crippled Layer 1 in order to accomplish their layer 2 'innovation'. Which, for all intents and purposes, still sucks two years down the line. I think layer 1 isn't crippled but we didn't have a size increase just for the ability to do so. We aren't filling the current blocks, when we consistently have close to full 2mb blocks we can have the fun little discussion on 4mb blocks. No need to rush to wildly large blocks just for theoretical reasons. Mmmm hmmm. Mmmm hmmm. Just for argument's sake, how long do you think it will take to roll out a block doubling once the decision is even made?* We have the data - persistently full blocks leads to the fee needed to get a tx handled promptly skyrocketing by several orders of magnitude within weeks. *Let alone how long the argument will drone on before the community finally shakes their collective delusion, and accedes to the necessity. |
|
|
|
I think he’s very likely to be a paid shill.
You can consider it likely if you want. But I am not paid for my advocacy of Bitcoins in any flavor, be it SV, BCH, or BTC. Meantime, half of y'all are whoring out your reputations to shill some crap product in y'all's sigs. Imagine the irony. I would never expect you to be a shill, I think they have you and most of the BCH community wrong. I just think you are all very ideological and wanting Bitcoin to be a digital cash and see no use of anything not directly on the blockchain. No second layer no whatnot, I don't have any issue with second layer innovation, per se. What galls me is that Blockstream and the rest of Core deliberately crippled Layer 1 in order to accomplish their layer 2 'innovation'. Which, for all intents and purposes, still sucks two years down the line. Oh for fucks sake it's not crippling it's simply preferring security, distribution and censorship resistance OVER EVERYTHING ELSE. Your assertion is not supported by any factual analysis that I have ever seen. Show your work. |
|
|
|
blocksize increase would not have stopped the stupid ass forks.. unless it were to break bitcoin, which was part of their goal to change bitcoin's governance and make bitcoin easier to change.....
Again with the delusion. One of the major 'features' in The SegWit Omnibus Changeset was for the sole stated purpose of making Bitcoin easier to change in the future. |
|
|
|
Still unanswered: How LN is going to help when Layer 1 is already clogged to the point of uselessness.
We will cross that bridge when we get there. If this price pump continues, we could get there next week. Unfortunately, there is no solution on the horizon under discussion. .. OK, JJG. Tell me what the plan is to deal with the fact that once blocks are persistently full, then average fees rise uncontrollably, average wait times raise uncontrollably, LN channel openings and closings get economically prohibitive, and number of new entrants gets hard-capped. What is the plan, JJG - what is the plan? Bitcoin don't no need additional plan, So you admit that the bolded statement of yours above was an untruthful attack. Nope. I am not admitting that bitcoin has no plan. I am just cursorily dismissing your assertion that whatever is going on in bitcoin is deficient in terms of preparing for the future. OK, so you keep asserting that BTC has a plan to deal with the negative effects of persistently full blocks. HOWEVER, after repeated requests to reveal what that plan actually consists of, you do nothing but deflect and dissemble. I call BullShit. I like bitcoin's conservative approach.
Then you are deluded. BTC's The SegWit Omnibus Changeset was the most radical change ever to be foisted upon Bitcoin, from every discernable dimension. It changed the protocol radically, it changed the supported use cases radically, it changed the economics radically, and it drove a huge percentage of Bitcoiners to greener pastures. |
|
|
|
I think he’s very likely to be a paid shill.
You can consider it likely if you want. But I am not paid for my advocacy of Bitcoins in any flavor, be it SV, BCH, or BTC. Meantime, half of y'all are whoring out your reputations to shill some crap product in y'all's sigs. Imagine the irony. I would never expect you to be a shill, I think they have you and most of the BCH community wrong. I just think you are all very ideological and wanting Bitcoin to be a digital cash and see no use of anything not directly on the blockchain. No second layer no whatnot, I don't have any issue with second layer innovation, per se. What galls me is that Blockstream and the rest of Core deliberately crippled Layer 1 in order to accomplish their layer 2 'innovation'. Which, for all intents and purposes, still sucks two years down the line. |
|
|
|
I'll just leave this snippet from the article here: As noted in Lightning Peach’s blog, “all actions must be routed through” Peach’s servers which “connect directly to other users.” |
|
|
|
Bitcoin Cash lacks the competitive advantage of other cryptocurrencies
Debatable. It also is still relatively new,
Bzzt. Wrong. With a history traceable back to the satoshi genesis block (i.e., being one of the Bitcoin forks), there is no cryptocurrency older than Bitcoin Cash. |
|
|
|
'zackly. Thanks.
Which, of course, bears directly upon the attack you made upon me regarding my (previous, now vindicated) publicly-stated belief that BCH would be worth more than $195.
You didn't vindicate shit. Your prediction was that BCH would be going up the next week, NOT 3.5 months later. Like I already said, anybody can be right about anything given a long enough time frame. If you want me to dig through the thread and find your exact post I'll do it. Here, I found the original quote: yeah, i lost my only chance to buy cheap bch at $92
Yup! BCH price was going up very fast, i missed the chance to buy at below $100 Of course, next week you may be looking back thinking 'I should have bought when it was below $300'. Don't be that guy. Your target date for a $300 BCH was December 29th. You blew your call spectacularly. By the way, BCH is still under $300, so in essence you've still been wrong this entire time, save for a few fleeting moments yesterday. Sideliners / casual readers: don't be that guy. You seem to be glossing over the 'may'. And as I have pointed out several times (upon which you keep dissembling) today's $287 is still a decent appreciation over $195. You really are a special sort of special. |
|
|
|
'zackly. Thanks.
Which, of course, bears directly upon the attack you made upon me regarding my (previous, now vindicated) publicly-stated belief that BCH would be worth more than $195.
You didn't vindicate shit. Your prediction was that BCH would be going up the next week, NOT 3.5 months later. Like I already said, anybody can be right about anything given a long enough time frame. If you want me to dig through the thread and find your exact post I'll do it. Go ahead. It wasn't a dated prediction, it was obviously speculation. The sentiment would have been understood by any rational being as 'BCH is likely to be worth more in the future than it is today - accordingly you might want to think twice about selling'. Why you think you need to blow this one incident into some sort of moratorium on my character is totally beyond me. Whatevs. Knock yourself out. |
|
|
|
Still unanswered: How LN is going to help when Layer 1 is already clogged to the point of uselessness.
We will cross that bridge when we get there. If this price pump continues, we could get there next week. Unfortunately, there is no solution on the horizon under discussion. .. OK, JJG. Tell me what the plan is to deal with the fact that once blocks are persistently full, then average fees rise uncontrollably, average wait times raise uncontrollably, LN channel openings and closings get economically prohibitive, and number of new entrants gets hard-capped. What is the plan, JJG - what is the plan? Bitcoin don't no need additional plan, So you admit that the bolded statement of yours above was an untruthful attack. |
|
|
|
OK. I mean, BTC can support a fuckload of people if none of them ever makes a tx. But that's not a usable MoE nor SoV. Not to mention the fact that to even get there will take literally decades. Like forty years for each person alive to make a single tx to buy into the system.
Have you ever considered that it doesn't have to reach every person alive to be a success? As I pointed out above -- an assertion for which you took me to task -- a hard cap on the number of participants. It's already an astounding success -- far more than anybody could have possibly imagined when it was getting started.
Many of us imagined all this and more. Use of LN requires on-chain txs. Once the chain is full, LN breaks. We're bearing down on Blockpocolypse II, and there is still no relief valve.
1. Blockpocalypse 1 never happened. Its a fear-inducing term used by bcashers and SVers to make themselves feel righteous about choosing their particular shitcoin. 2. The chain has never been full. Again, you're trying to claim that the chain will be unusable which has never happened. Expensive or slow is hardly the same thing as "unusable." 2a. Allow me to put a finer point on it. 'Blocks became persistently full'. Better? Good. But you knew that's precisely what I meant, did you not? 2b. Yes, the system became unusable for a number of important use cases. And it will again when blocks again become persistently full. 1. Whether or not you want to refer to such a state as 'Blockpocolypse' is up to you. But it is an apt label for block size limitations being the reason for the exit of many participants. Not to mention the relative irrelevance of LN in general. The average BTC on-chain tx is currently around $20,000.00.
What's LN channel max value again?
LN isn't meant for huge transactions. Its meant for every-day transacting. It wasn't developed for Wall Street or whales to shift around millions. Great. I see you agree to my assessment that LN is not a capable replacement for real Bitcoin. That's kind of an aside, however, as the entire point is to have capacity to accommodate the demand. Which is the economic model that nurtured Bitcoin until Blockstream threw out all the sane devs.
What demand? The demand in excess of about a half-mil txs a day -- a number BTC is trending incessantly towards, and is already perilously close to. In the meantime, you're hanging your hopes on a Rube Goldberg monstrosity that is years away from delivering on its promises. |
|
|
|
Can people stop engaging Jbreher. If I want to read his bullshit I'll go to /r/btc. He's beyond salvation.
He seems ok as a person but his bitcoin views seem a bit silly. He’s clearly a really intelligent guy so I see his pro BCH & BCHSV agendas as very suspicious. I think he’s very likely to be a paid shill. You can consider it likely if you want. But I am not paid for my advocacy of Bitcoins in any flavor, be it SV, BCH, or BTC. Meantime, half of y'all are whoring out your reputations to shill some crap product in y'all's sigs. Imagine the irony. |
|
|
|
Hey nutildah - which would you rather have:
a) $195; or
b) $337.99
Neither. You either: did not read the actual question posed to you; or you answer dishonestly. What the fuck are you even asking me? Do I want one number or the other? What is the context? OK I'll play along: give me the higher number, because its bigger  'zackly. Thanks. Which, of course, bears directly upon the attack you made upon me regarding my (previous, now vindicated) publicly-stated belief that BCH would be worth more than $195. |
|
|
|
IRONY
"flawed pale imitation"
Hey bitcoinPsycho - which of the following are closer to the original design of the Bitcoin protocol as designed by Satoshi: 1) BTC; or 2) BCH Hmm? Sorry I don't do religion. Tech evolves. No one man or woman have all the answers It ain't religion, it's a simple 2-choice question. Afraid to answer it, bitcoinPsycho?To reiterate, BTC is but a flawed pale imitation of Satoshi's system, while Bitcoin Cash hews more closely to that original genius design. <<blah blah blah>> You contribute nothing to the conversation. There is a question to bitcoinPsycho upon the table, which s/he seems to be dodging. One that relates directly to his/her reply to my point. Meantime, nutildah charges in blustering irrelevancy. As if s/he doesn't have the capacity for determining what the topic is. You must be so much fun at parties. /s I must admit I have not fully read the satoshi white paper so will not be able to answer your question . Yet you feel compelled to publicly expound upon things of which you are completely ignorant. Whatevs. I'm backing BTC . I swapped my bch at .2 btc. Was not impressed with the whole "bch is the real bitcoin" toxicity. I don't pretend to know everything. Doesn't mean I'm right or wrong. I respect you but I don't have to agree with you . With the modest amount I do know I still think big blocks is not the answer at this point. imho LTC is better than bch Which is all fine and dandy. You are certainly entitled to your own opinions. But you are not entitled to your own facts. And fact is that the protocols implemented by both BCH and BSV have much more in common with the original satoshi protocol than does that of BTC - which is the assertion I made upthread for which you decided to take me to task. If you had not mistakenly refuted my truthful claim above, we could have skipped this entire sorry sideshow twig of this thread. |
|
|
|
Hey nutildah - which would you rather have:
a) $195; or
b) $337.99
Neither. You either: did not read the actual question posed to you; or you answer dishonestly. |
|
|
|
Everyone who runs a node please raise your hand.
Several. |
|
|
|
^^^ I remember me being a bit rude towards him as well, and he always countered me very polite, I (already longer time) massively changed my behavior towards him cause as you say, on BTC everybody can have his own OPINION, I do hate Jbreher's thought but @the same time he does own BTC as well .... so can't be so bad, later on he will regret of not being completely in BTC alone... But I do remember me acting wrong towards him, common Jbreher go FULL BTC  You know mic I tried being polite to him in turn but then sometimes he's just massively cockish for no good reason and my desire to be polite flies out the window. You seem to be conflating a discussion of differing ideas as an attack. Perhaps you are so wedded to your dogma that any criticism of your axioms appears to you as a personal attack. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
