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? |
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
was considering to publicly announce that everytime a fuckin´big blocker posts in the WO thread I will order a casa node.
Where are you going to stack them all? |
|
|
|
don’t really understand why people are waiting to see 20k price levels so soon.
Because we'll be above $100K some time in the next two years, and we can't get there without crossing the previous ATH. |
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
Well, from a protocol aspect, SV does have more in common with the original Bitcoin protocol than does BTC.
#justsayin'
SV is highly centralised with a small handful of insiders who control it False. It is no more centralized than any other major crypto. Like all Bcash forks, it was strip mined to shit with the Emergency Difficulty Adjustment on launch
'Strip mined to shit'?. Right. Gimme that in percentage terms. And tell me the measurable down side that you seem to imply. A centralised, strip mined fork is a long way from 'Satoshi's Vision', whatever that is supposed to mean
Good thing you're describing something other than SV. I am not going to argue with you about it because I have better things to do
Yet you just did. Or rather just swooped in to sling shit. For you have not addressed in your reply the point I made. To wit: from a protocol aspect, SV does have more in common with the original Bitcoin protocol than does BTC. |
|
|
|
Maybe it was intended to be, because it was already all it needed to be, and a damned sight better than a bastardized knockoff with a segwit poison pill.
I have followed through your arguments vs HM's. So it's pretty pointless to have this discussion. I would probably believe such intentions, if they did not originate from a reputed con man. Have you heard him express himself? Drug dealers on the streets are nicer. Craig is not the coin. The coin is defined by the protocol. Period. Peeps is just peeps. |
|
|
|
Mmm Hmm... Meanwhile, the average BTC block size has been creeping up again. We may already be on the edge of the next blockalypse.
The first blockalypse never happened. What has happened since December 2017? BCH's market share has plummeted and bitcoin has survived just fine. Un Hunh. And what happened to all that adoption that was building - right up until the point that BTC could not handle the demand? Which of course will be accompanied by ever-lengthening confirmation times, and soaring fees. Once BTC returns to its eventual equilibrium of unusability, where do you think the tx demand is going to go?
Well that's easy: Lightning Network. No. LN cannot onboard enough people fast enough to be a contender. Not to mention all the evil that will be unleashed when the chain does not have the capacity to handle renewals or cashouts. Even if it had the value capacity for meaningful commerce. Or even if it had simple clients. Or the ability to route in a malleable environment of channels coming and going, with users wanting trustless, permissionless, decentralized operation. |
|
|
|
Mmm Hmm... Meanwhile, the average BTC block size has been creeping up again. We may already be on the edge of the next blockalypse. Which of course will be accompanied by ever-lengthening confirmation times, and soaring fees. Once BTC returns to its eventual equilibrium of unusability, where do you think the tx demand is going to go? Wakey wakey indeed. What do you suggest? Another fork? No. See the title of this thread for a suggestion. |
|
|
|
Mmm Hmm... Meanwhile, the average BTC block size has been creeping up again. We may already be on the edge of the next blockalypse. Which of course will be accompanied by ever-lengthening confirmation times, and soaring fees. Once BTC returns to its eventual equilibrium of unusability, where do you think the tx demand is going to go? Wakey wakey indeed. |
|
|
|
Well, from a protocol aspect, SV does have more in common with the original Bitcoin protocol than does BTC.
#justsayin'
Maybe it was intended to be, so that you can have that exact argument. Maybe it was intended to be, because it was already all it needed to be, and a damned sight better than a bastardized knockoff with a segwit poison pill. |
|
|
|
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' |
|
|
|
Good afternoon JBear
How is the PR trip going? Does the missus approve?
Over. Taxiing after landing at the home airport. She seems fairly enthusiastic about island life. Longer sitrep to follow. |
|
|
|
I don’t doubt that after 10 years of litigation, Craig’s patents will be found invalid as well.
Because you have read them, you have extensive knowledge of the subject area each one covers, are conversant with all related existing patents, and you have made a meaningful analysis of each? Or because reasons (i.e., Craig derangement syndrome)? |
|
|
|
Aren't patent trolls "losers," even if they make money?
How so? There is a realistic debate to be had centering on the legitimacy of the concept of patents. But 'winners' and 'losers' are only identifiable as such within the context of the rules of the system. So, no: patent owners are by definition winners. At least to the extent to which others may want to employ the patented idea (i.e., even if they make money). I think that I already explained my position. If you want to value winners based on their ability to get rich by any means, then you can do that. It ain't _me_ doing the valuing. Getting rich is how society as a whole values the contribution made thereto. That's kind of the way market economies work. You are the one bringing it up and arguing that if CSW is able to get rich, then he is a wonderful "winner"... Really!? You are the one who inserted the winners/losers concept into the discourse (see quote above). All I'm saying is that your characterization of 'loser' is categorically and diametrically in-fucking-correct. |
|
|
|
2. Australian Tax Office. Why haven’t they caught him and extradited him? Dunno.
'Last you heard'. Right. What - the crown is not honoring the tax office of the crown? I rather doubt it. 3. I am not claiming specific patents are invalid.
MmmHmm... And the following is just skepticism, rather than outright ignorant slander? : He can't simultaneously have a mound of patents (for which core sycophants regularly excoriate him), and not have any patents.
There is no impediment to him having a mound of invalid patents. |
|
|
|
He can't simultaneously have a mound of patents (for which core sycophants regularly excoriate him), and not have any patents.
There is no impediment to him having a mound of invalid patents. Sure, there's an impediment. While the bar isn't so high as to be infallible, passing patent review is at least prima fascie evidence of validity. So are you claiming all of nChain's patents are invalid? Bahahahaha not in this day and age So you are not claiming that all of nChain's patents are invalid. Got it. Are you claiming that any of nChain's patents are invalid? If so, which ones? I am claiming that Craig is a known con man who is a fugitive from Australian authorities for tax fraud [fact] I am claiming that the US Patent Office is grossly underfunded [fact] and was highly unlikely to have had any crypto expertise at the time the patents were taken out [supposition] I am claiming that that a known conman might just make up a bunch of bullshit troll patents and gotten them past the Patent Office which has no idea what it is doing [supposition] So rather than clarify and defend your accusatory statement, you instead continue to dissemble. I guess I'm done with this twig then. For you to be defending someone who is on the run from the authorities for fraud, and claiming that his patents must be valid is laughable.
1) I'm not defending him, I am injecting some much needed objectivity into the discussion. 2) If Craig is on the run from the authorities for fraud, then which jurisdiction is it, and why has he not been extradited to that jurisdiction? 3) I am not making any claim that his patents are valid. I stated as much several posts back. However, you quite clearly insinuated that they are invalid. I am merely trying to understand the bounds of your insinuation. But we all now see that you are unable to man up to your insinuation. |
|
|
|
More relevant is the rest of the post, which refers to the rest of the email, where satoshi explains that in time, nodes would be operated mostly by well-funded enterprises dedicating large capital to the task.
"The rest will be client nodes that only do transactions and don't generate." exactly. |
|
|
|
He can't simultaneously have a mound of patents (for which core sycophants regularly excoriate him), and not have any patents.
There is no impediment to him having a mound of invalid patents. Sure, there's an impediment. While the bar isn't so high as to be infallible, passing patent review is at least prima fascie evidence of validity. So are you claiming all of nChain's patents are invalid? Bahahahaha not in this day and age So you are not claiming that all of nChain's patents are invalid. Got it. Are you claiming that any of nChain's patents are invalid? If so, which ones? |
|
|
|
Hmm. I don't see it as doing 'everything I can', I see it as bringing some semblance of balance.
Crimes? What crimes? Has he been incarcerated? Convicted? Tried even? (Other than in the court of public opinion, that is) Hyperbolic much?
Defending a known narcisstic lying charlatan in an effort of "bringing some semblance of balance" is trolling. So, in your world, the assumption that a given party is a liar is sufficient grounds for propagating any number of other lies about that party? Got it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
