jbreher is a cunt.
And by such measure, the level of WO discourse is elevated.  |
|
|
|
Again, you have no fucking idea. Without the work I have done over the last few decades (and continue to do), your computer -- the one you are using right now, be it phone, laptop, workstation, or mainframe -- would operate differently than it does today. From moments after flipping the power switch until shutdown, there is a piece of my brain that your computer is utterly dependent upon.
It's the second time you mention that - so far as I'm aware. We can agree that you are smart. Don't want to dox you or anything, but I would like to know something more specific than that if possible. Care to elaborate? No. Some have figured it out. Chissakes, it ain't that opaque. |
|
|
|
The galling thing is that the underlying base protocol was intentionally crippled in order to implement LN. The fact that such crippling wasn't even necessary only adds insult to injury, and calls into question the motives and wisdom of those who advocated for such.
In order to build on the basic protocol, fixing transaction malleability was long overdue. It could have been done some other way, right. Or things could have been left broken, as is the case for some shitcoins. 'Fixing malleability' was a gratuitous change that claimed to resolve something that was an absolute non-issue. It was the manner in which it was accomplished, and the other changes bundled into The SegWit Omnibus Changeset that were the true evils. From my perspective, malleability was not an instance of broken-ness. |
|
|
|
BCH is still a top 10 coin with over $500m in daily trading volume
You trying to NOT win WO thread friends, angel55? Do you wish to argue the facts asserted, JJG, or do you just want to sling shit? There is no need for me to argue off topic issues in this thread, right? Need? No - no need, per se. Though if you wish to respond directly to someone's post, most would it expect it to have something to do with that quoted post. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the paywall avoidance link. Best quote: Regulators' advance: The Financial Stability Board (FSB) — a who's who of regulators from the powerful G20 countries — has become the latest watchdog to sound the alarm about Big Tech's potential impact on financial stability. The FSB warned last week that tech firms could “materially alter” financial services, creating stability risks as incumbents take chances to keep up. (emphasis added) |
|
|
|
BCH is still a top 10 coin with over $500m in daily trading volume
You trying to NOT win WO thread friends, angel55? Do you wish to argue the facts asserted, JJG, or do you just want to sling shit? Thanks a fucking lot, you know JJG is going to post a 13 paragraph post of just rambling and bullshit now. Did you really have to bait him like this? Umm... sorry? |
|
|
|
hereby reserving the right to be crass and to be generally unbecoming
Well, yeah. But we would expect no less from you. |
|
|
|
[jbreher] So this bcash shill, big block fanboy who tries to tell naive folks in bitcoin forums they should abandon their valuable btc and buy this scammy shitcoin is still around here? Either completely masochistic or - much more likely - paid shill. I wonder how many of those who believed the ongoing misleading, scammy posts of this shill have lost money because they bought worthless bcash.
and even after all his arguments are proven to be misleading/false, even after loosing all the battles, even after the split, even after complete defeat, he still comes back in here and keeps shilling with the same lame arguments that weren´t true the first few rounds. shame on this guy. doesn´t seem to have even the slightest trace of honor in him. very sad. why the fuck he isn´t posting in bcash forums, why here? paid. disgusting.
i dont recall jbreher ever saying to dump btc for bcash_lol, at least here in WO. he has made a choice based on his understanding of the protocols and potential advantages. hes well aware of the potential use cases of each. and hes one of the smarter people here and at least understands both sides. now, i dumped my bcash_lol except for a small amount im to lazy to do anything with. im a 100% believer btc. please note im not defending jbreher, he is perfectly capable of defending himself fine. i just think your post comes across as crass, misleading and generally unbecoming of a WO participant. Thanks for the injection of reality. I appreciate it. |
|
|
|
Craig is not the coin. The coin is defined by the protocol. Period. Peeps is just peeps.
Sure, but it is represented by a person/entity or - more precisely - by a team of people under that entity. In our case Bcash SV's ambassador, is that fucking greedy sorry excuse of a (con) man. So greedy that he can't even do that properly. Totally abased. 'Represented'. Right. Seems the meanings of 'permissionless' and 'decentralized' has escaped yet another's attention. |
|
|
|
I'll see your Svetlana Miljus and raise you an Anna Semenovich. You're welcome. |
|
|
|
I think Jbreher is still upset computers moved to those newfangled transistor things from valves.
Even those he had to be convinced about. Relays did the job ok.
Again, you have no fucking idea. Without the work I have done over the last few decades (and continue to do), your computer -- the one you are using right now, be it phone, laptop, workstation, or mainframe -- would operate differently than it does today. From moments after flipping the power switch until shutdown, there is a piece of my brain that your computer is utterly dependent upon. Valves are for guitar amps. And radio transmitters. |
|
|
|
Yeh lets abandon the Bitcoin Network and jump on xrp version 2 lightning network (LN) instead.
I beg your pardon ? Lightning IS Bitcoin. Lightning transactions are not on chain, so they are therefore not Bitcoin transactions. So if LN txs are not Bitcoin txs, it follows that ... I'm not trying to claim that LN is useless. It will likely have benefits for some limited applications. But to pin BTC's future on it when simpler methods were available... smh. Going to have to pull you up on that one mate... LN Opens and Closed channel onchain. therefore they are BTC transactions. On another note, i don't know why people are discounting LN. This is some awesome development/technology. What you see now may be different in 5 -10 years from now, there alot of smart people with forward thinking minds. Not only the opening and closing are BTC transactions... but also each micropayment within the channels are done with BTC transactions which each channel partner can put on-chain. No. Only the aggregate state can be put on-chain. (Which, of course, opens up a host of potential attacks.) Not each channel tx. |
|
|
|
I must have been unclear when I said I wasn’t going to discuss it with you because you have got big old bags and only talk your book
Hopefully, there is someone out there to pump that shit for jbreher (oh jbreher is that someone). So this bcash shill, big block fanboy who tries to tell naive folks in bitcoin forums they should abandon their valuable btc and buy this scammy shitcoin is still around here? Well, there goes the respect I had for you. You better check your fucking assumptions, boyo. I have never advocated that people abandon their BTC for BCH or SV. The fact that I advocate the big block branches of the Bitcoin family tree -- from a technical viewpoint -- does not make me someone who tries to talk anyone into anything. Except maybe being a bit more discerning. Either completely masochistic or - much more likely - paid shill.
Haha. Again with the shit slinging. You have no fucking idea. So why don't you just shut up regarding things about which you do not know. I wonder how many of those who believed the ongoing misleading, scammy posts of this shill have lost money because they bought worthless bcash.
misleading and scammy, eh? Care to argue any of the points I have made? Probably not, as you demonstrably would rather just attack a strawman meant to represent me. and even after all his arguments are proven to be misleading/false,
Which arguments have been proven false? Quotes or links to such, please. even after loosing all the battles, even after the split, even after complete defeat, he still comes back in here and keeps shilling with the same lame arguments that weren´t true the first few rounds.
Pretty much only when false statements need correcting. Deal with it. Incidentally, see my sidesig. Which may be a cheap shot, but at least it is based upon objective reality, as opposed to your slanderous character assassination. shame on this guy. doesn´t seem to have even the slightest trace of honor in him.
No honor, eh? You would rather let lies, slander, and mistruth stand as the record? Nay, that is dishonorable. very sad. why the fuck he isn´t posting in bcash forums,
I am unaware of any 'bcash forums'. If you mean fora dedicated to Bitcoin Cash, I do. What of it? why here?
Because this is the epicenter of the Bitcoin community. I mean, if you want to argue against my assertion that: from a protocol standpoint, both BCH and SV have more in common with the original Bitcoin protocol than does BTC. But everyone who has saddled up that horse has so far been dispatched. Care to give it a go? paid.
Abso-fucking-lutely false. Prove it. Put up or shut up. disgusting.
 |
|
|
|
Yeh lets abandon the Bitcoin Network and jump on xrp version 2 lightning network (LN) instead.
I beg your pardon ? Lightning IS Bitcoin. Lightning transactions are not on chain, so they are therefore not Bitcoin transactions. So if LN txs are not Bitcoin txs, it follows that ... I'm not trying to claim that LN is useless. It will likely have benefits for some limited applications. But to pin BTC's future on it when simpler methods were available... smh. Going to have to pull you up on that one mate... LN Opens and Closed channel onchain. therefore they are BTC transactions. Just no. The opening and the closing are Bitcoin transactions. All the in-channel transactions are NOT Bitcoin transactions. Sorry. This should be obvious. On another note, i don't know why people are discounting LN. This is some awesome development/technology. What you see now may be different in 5 -10 years from now, there alot of smart people with forward thinking minds.
I'm only 'discounting' LN against the absurd claims made for it. As a layer 2 protocol, I'm completely whatevs with whatever all y'all want to do with a layer 2 thingy. The galling thing is that the underlying base protocol was intentionally crippled in order to implement LN. The fact that such crippling wasn't even necessary only adds insult to injury, and calls into question the motives and wisdom of those who advocated for such. |
|
|
|
Problem is that nocoiners and the new crypto enthusiast will fall for this scams and they will buy into bCash before even introduced to the real Bitcoin.
Well, from a protocol aspect, SV does have more in common with the original Bitcoin protocol than does BTC. #justsayin' still pumping (supposedly defending) bcash, trash? #yeahright Just making a point. Do you wish to argue the contrary view? Again: from a protocol aspect, SV does have more in common with the original Bitcoin protocol than does BTC. Let me give you the benefit of the doubt in regards to your "original vision" claims. Even if true, such supposed alignment with bitcoin's original vision is not going to make any kind of impact if the shit does not work because the vast majority of the community (more than 95%) has moved on to various upgrades, which seems to be the case in regards to where bitcoin is at today versus bcash sv... So you cede the point. Great. We're making progress. I'm gonna cede the point that the majority of the community prefers BTC to BCH or SV. For the time being. Though I am not going to cede your ridiculous claim that 'shit does not work'. Both BCH and SV work beautifully. And they will continue to work when usage once again strangles BTC, rendering it once again unusable. Which will likely have a salutary effect upon the relative preferences for BTC and its larger-blocked brethren. |
|
|
|
|
thread is speeding up
hard to keep up with the tip
sign of coming bull?
|
|
|
|
I must have been unclear when I said I wasn’t going to discuss it with you because you have got big old bags and only talk your book
Yet my 'book' has 'bags' on both sides of this argument. If you're going to claim that necessarily invalidates one's viewpoints, then I am free of such taint, while you are fully complicit (assuming your bags are free of Bitcoin Cash, which you seem to imply). Not to mention, of course, that you continue to discuss it. |
|
|
|
cannot quote ^^^it properly.
It's not mining elitism, it is how it works since Satoshi made it public.
If you think that owning btc makes you or anyone else a contributor, no it does not (in a POW system), but it does in a POS system where you mine using your stake.
IN POW system miners and node-owners control the system.
Simply owning btc is OK, but you are effectively cut off out of all decision making that might affect your btc.
This is just a statement of fact, nothing personal.
You are taking a technology centric view and ignoring economic soft power. UASF proved the strength of economic hodlers. No, it did not. That battle was never fought. Don't get fooled by Bcash propaganda that miners vote.
That's not 'Bcash propaganda'. Miners don't vote, so much as they create the blockchain. If the blockchain you desire does not get extended, your holdings are worth.... what, again? Meanwhile Bitmain is sitting on a pile of Bcash that no one wants.
With its lofty position in the market cap rankings, your pronouncement upon Bitcoin Cash desirability is manifestly bullshit. |
|
|
|
POS ... then becomes a self sustaining whirlpool of doom
<beavis_voice>Huh huh.</beavis_voice> Eloquent phraseology. <beavis_voice>Huh huh.</beavis_voice> |
|
|
|
I like to think he ritually destroyed his keys.
That's an option indeed. It is also possible (I don't believe this) that he could have them in reserve to use if he ever wanted to destroy his creation. Sometimes you need a built in kill switch.  5% is pretty weak for a kill switch. More like an owie switch. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
