Yes, that's why nearly everyone in crypto uses Bitcoin and not whatever it is you're trying to peddle. 

That's because "the blockchain" itself isn't a hardware wallet.  Hardware wallets are used to store cryptographic keys securely offline.  Keys give you access to spend bitcoins on the blockchain.  Copies of the blockchain are stored on devices all around the world.  You need to familiarise yourself with some of the basic definitions.

I get the impression Vlad2Vlad isn't a BSV shill.  They appear to dislike Bitcoin and all the forkcoins in equal measure.  If I had to guess, they're only clinging onto hope that Faketoshi is successful simply because any coin Faketoshi is associated with would be seen in a negative light.  

Maybe then people will pay attention to Vlad2Vlad's altcoin that no one cares about.  

It's not "hard to explain" in the slightest.  They think this little Faketoshi pantomime is beneficial to other altcoins, namely theirs, so they're playing along and stoking the fire.

Most of the altcoins claiming to be the most up-to-date technology have a single developer who might update the code repository once a week, maybe.  Then after a while, they get bored of developing a dead-end project and disappear.  

Bitcoin, on the other hand, has numerous developers and frequent updates.  It can't be "old tech" if it's updated more frequently than the gimmicky altcoin projects that fold and vanish without a trace when they run out of marketing buzzwords to throw around.

People also need to consider how useful any new technology actually is.  Someone could invent a portable machine that allows you to simulate arctic temperatures in your living room, which would be an impressive technological accomplishment.  But who actually needs that?  A lot of people don't need the supposed benefits these altcoins are claiming to offer.

Their explanation is that Faketoshi's strategy is simply beyond our mortal comprehension:


We're all apparently just too stupid to see how committing perjury and fraud is going to prove that Faketoshi was really a genius all along.   

So now the argument from the SV brigade is that perjuring yourself with provable lies is the work of a genius?  You're going to have to explain that one in a little more depth, I think.  What part of Faketoshi's "chess strategy" is accomplished by becoming a convicted felon?

Placing any restrictions on who can work during a time when you're trying to encourage people to work seems counter-productive.

Also, I'm not sure that would be very practical to implement.  If you only allow one worker per household, what would you do with a couple if they both worked as doctors, for example?  Are you going to tell one of those doctors that they can't save lives during a pandemic?

More people should be equipped to work from home where possible.  Those who have to work in a place that need to deal with people in person should be provided with all the necessary protective equipment to keep them safe and distance should be maintained wherever possible.  Most countries are getting it right, but the US and UK in particular have handled it abysmally.  It's only natural that their economies are being hit harder than others as a result.

Is it a fair assumption that the Bitcoin users won? 

The only way I could see crypto users being thwarted is if the government managed to catch them at the "converting fiat to Bitcoin" stage.  Once someone is in possession of Bitcoin, assuming they can evade physical capture, there's no contest.

Any exchanges handling fiat are strictly regulated and have numerous rules they need to comply with, so it stands to reason that some exchanges simply don't want the hassle of dealing with that.  Which is why it's generally much easier to find non-fiat exchange pairings.  KYC/AML is the problem.  It's supposedly a safeguard to protect consumers, but I'm yet to be convinced of that, personally.

If anyone is trying to peddle the ridiculous notion that BLM protests are a significant contributor to the economic issues in the US and other western countries, I'd genuinely like to know what their real agenda is.  Call that bullshit out wherever you see it happening, because it's not a cause for the looming recession.  If anything, protests over institutionalised racism and classism are one of the symptoms of a broken economy, not the cause.  Whoever is spreading the false narrative that protests are somehow causing the economy to fail is clearly trying to deflect from the real problem.  Yet another shameful attempt to shift blame and scapegoat the victims.  It's a common divide and conquer tactic.  

Also, this topic would probably be more at home in the economics board, since it has very little to do with Bitcoin.

An important point.  Because privacy has the potential to be somewhat contentious, it's difficult to say how many privacy-oriented features will find their way into the base protocol.  There are many opinions, but we'll have to wait and see what rules users choose to enforce.  Some people have also speculated in the past about "privacy layers" that can be built separately and users can opt in to those if they desire more anonymity.  These could potentially exist even if others disagree with them.

That's not how arguing with franky1 works, you have to keep "researching" until you arrive at the same fantasy conclusion franky1 arrived at.   

Don't let anything get in the way of a good fairytale.  Facts, references, citations, they're all totally meaningless when they conflict with the soap opera storyline franky1 has concocted in his special brain.

A "ban" could be put in place, but it's unlikely to be an effective ban.  Unless you're getting your coins mixed up again, maybe?  Usage of BSV would be comparatively easier to restrict by a government than usage of BTC.  BSV has fewer nodes, limited infrastructure, weak decentralisation, etc.  Not to mention the so-called leadership's stance on regulatory compliance.  You'll put your hands up and surrender when you're told to. 

It's just more time for Faketoshi to dig himself a deeper hole.  The longer it drags on for, the greater the quantity of perjury he'll be guilty of, since he just can't keep his big dumb mouth shut.  Another day, another lie to make up.

Conversely, I could ask who are the madmen in government who think they can fight a branch of mathematics?  How do you practically and viably ban numbers?  That's all we're using here.  Large, nigh-impossible-to-calculate numbers.

Also, the game theory doesn't work out well on their end.  Many people have commented in the past that if they make crypto illegal, that would likely only drive it underground.  So they need to play nice and employ their usual "nudge theory tactics" (be on the lookout for those), or they risk crypto users choosing to play hardball and becoming more militant about what we do.  At the moment, I think it's safe to say most of us would describe ourselves as "enthusiasts" or "hobbyists", but if someone told me I couldn't do this stuff anymore, I'll be giving 'em the ol' middle finger and finding ways to flout whatever legislation they opt to put in place.

Faketoshi speaks as a charlatan with a criminal background.



You can trust the fallible and ever-changing concepts of "law" if you like.

I'm going to trust the comparatively indisputable laws of physics and mathematics. 

Mathematics confirm Wright is a fraud.  No court of law on the face of the planet is going to convince me otherwise.  The numbers don't lie.  That's Faketoshi's speciality.

I'm all for pointing out faketoshi's bullshit, but I'm pretty sure a fair amount of the credit for the "anyone can spend" drivel still belongs to the original crypto wingnut MP and his trilema blog, which I believe pre-date faketoshi's equally dumb blogs by some margin.

So you think the appropriate response is to bow to the pressure and allow the tyrants to have it all their own way?  Maybe my outlook is just generally more subversive than average, but I'd never think that way.  All the things you mentioned are concepts that need to be challenged and anything that helps put power back in the hands of normal people is another step towards those in authority realising they aren't as "in control" as they thought.

//EDIT:  And while it's a post responding to a completely different thread, I feel like this response applies aptly here as well:

We can't walk on eggshells here. 

---

I still believe exchanges in their present, fundamentally misused, format are on borrowed time.  I hope there will come a point where we simply won't do that sort of thing anymore, because it definitely wasn't part of the design concept to have these entities holding the keys to vast tranches of BTC.  The very concept of a centralised exchange is inherently weak and vulnerable to pressure from authorities.  It's no coincidence that  regulators so easily identified the choke point they could squeeze.  We're bound to come up with something better at some point.  I'm just hoping the rate of technological development will continue to outpace the legal framework designed to contain it.

I like the enthusiasm, but we also need to add a touch of realism.  To say it "could solve Bitcoin’s privacy problem" is a tad oversimplified.  It solves one aspect, but there are plenty of other privacy issues to consider as well.  This Bitcoin Wiki page has enough material on the matter to keep people busy for a while.

The point was, if a relative stranger suddenly appears on DT, regardless of who put them there, people are going to check to see if there's a good reason for them to be there or not.  If people arrive at the conclusion they shouldn't be there, it may be the right course of action to distrust an unknown quantity.  Why do you immediately have to turn it into something sinister about who does or doesn't like you?  

You claim the trust system should be about what's best for the community, but in order for you to see the trust system doing exactly that, you need to stop making it all about you.  It's clearly affecting your judgement.  You can't honestly sit there and claim that having random people turn up on DT without a strong history of references or feedback is a positive thing.