Irgendwas müssen die ja schreiben .. oje |
|
|
|
Craig's new book is a joke. Just a bunch of his Medium posts bundled together.  It's not written by CSW - but fine u bring it up CSW isn't responsible for the contents of his own book? In your eyes he's just never made an error, has he. I bet he is mosty responsible for the contents - and sure human are about to make errors - what did u expect? Oh - u are part of the hodl fraction and wait for somebody else to deliver what u like ? LoL |
|
|
|
It doesn't really matter, for example bitcoin is the granddaddy of crypto coins but many altcoins have better features than bitcoin and not a singe one of these so called altcoins are able to kick the king's (bitcoin) crown out of its head for a whooping 10years and counting, the fact is will people choose hashgraph over bitcoin? i doubt it
As a fact of any good protocol, the 'feature' are not part of itself, but rather the protocol ensures security & stability and enables a lot of Features to be build on top of it ( like TCP/IP) Once u ve found out that the original BitCoin protocoll was and is already such and can scale - than all other funny 'Feature-protocols' are useless. |
|
|
|
Craig's new book is a joke. Just a bunch of his Medium posts bundled together. It's not written by CSW - but fine u bring it up |
|
|
|
.., aber das Protokoll müsste dann halt auch mitmachen, stabil, skalierbar und bizzele 'staats-freundlich' sein, gell?
Bitte was? Ich mein, über skalierbar kann man ja vortrefflich streiten und geteilter Meinung sein, aber in welchen Punkten ist das Protokoll denn instabil, oder staats-unfreundlich? Schließlich isses nich das Protokoll, das ein Problem damit hätte, auch vom Staat verwendet zu werden. Der Staat müsste also eher protokoll-freundlicher werden, als umgekehrt.  Ich glaube, wir fänden es alle gut, wenn der Staat seine Geschäfte alle bald auf einer neutralen, AML-Check freundlichen ( also transparenten, kein CoinJoin, Schnorr usw,... das macht es auch skalierbar) blockchain ONCHAIN machen muss, weil wir alle das natürlich auch benutzen. Dann wird er automatisch protokoll-freundlich und wir können besser kontrollieren als derzeit. Das ist doch ein Ziel. Oder - was haben wir davon, wenn der Staat LN benutzt, und keiner weiss wie , was & wo ? (Was er natürlich nie machen wird, da ja jeder Schmutz im LN passieren kann ... wenn's mal in 18Monaten funktioniert) EDIT: https://coingeek.com/us-treasury-cryptos-must-adhere-to-tough-market-regulations/ leider nur in Hoch-Anglo-Sächsisch |
|
|
|
Woher nimmt der Metzger eigentlich das Fiat mit denen er seine Lieferanten, Betrienskosten wie Strom, Wasser, Miete, Angestellten und Steuern bezahlt wenn er nur Bitcoins einnimmt?
Jupp - big Goal wäre natürlich, dass bald alle Bitcoin als Zahlungsmittel akzeptieren - u.a. der Staat. Im Schweizer Zug wird da schon dran gebastelt, aber das Protokoll müsste dann halt auch mitmachen, stabil, skalierbar und bizzele 'staats-freundlich' sein, gell? Wieso staats-freundlich? Vielleicht sollte der staat eher anfangen bürger-freundlich zu agieren bevor seine doch so geliebten Schaafe merken, dass nicht Sie in brauchen (in der jetzigen Form) sondern umgekehrt. Ich kann auch das verstehen, unsere Regierungen machen leider zu viel falsch - aber am ende sind wir teil dessen - und mit Bitcoin können WIR viel bewegen, nur geht das wie immer nur ZUSAMMEN MIT ALLEN - und nicht ein paar GEGEN z.B: den Staat... das wird nix |
|
|
|
Woher nimmt der Metzger eigentlich das Fiat mit denen er seine Lieferanten, Betrienskosten wie Strom, Wasser, Miete, Angestellten und Steuern bezahlt wenn er nur Bitcoins einnimmt?
Jupp - big Goal wäre natürlich, dass bald alle Bitcoin als Zahlungsmittel akzeptieren - u.a. der Staat. Im Schweizer Zug wird da schon dran gebastelt, aber das Protokoll müsste dann halt auch mitmachen, stabil, skalierbar und bizzele 'staats-freundlich' sein, gell? |
|
|
|
I wonder if BSV would like to join the alliance on https://nonfungiblealliance.org/Bringing together the NFT world !"As diverse and unique as the non-fungible space is, so are the visions, potentials, and opinions about it. Our goal is to provide a common platform for all non-fungible thinkers, enthusiasts, and creators. Join in and share your part, too. Some of the non-fungible perks: Exposure of your project - Early access to NFT solutions - Large community and network". BSV is just clean Bitcoin As A Maple Leaf is just clean gold Dunno why to join whatever. Btw: there is no CSW or other ppl needed in the equations above. So better be free and clean from anything else that is not really BitCoin. CSW and Calvin are intrinsically linked to BSV and as such BSV cannot claim to be "free and clean". And BSV is not Bitcoin. Stop lying to get people to buy your shitcoin.  Not sure what u are about, but there are many supporters for BSV and nothing where u can find I gave financial advice. U mixing up the troll's feed here or troll urself. I only give advice in USE. That's different from most of the ponzi advisors u might meet in this forum. |
|
|
|
Wait so Bitcoin = bad because Segwit is "indeed an alteration of the Bitcoin protocol"
BTC is suboptimal not merely because SegWit is an alteration, but because the SegWit Omnibus Changeset is a net negative alteration. but bcash Bsv = good because their shitty changes are "legitimate claim to a protocol change"
One of the things that makes BSV good is that it is being incrementally returned to the original Bitcoin protocol. Do try to keep up. Thus coming back to my comment about original design of planes not having jet engines and cars not having air bags etc... Can you provide any other technology which was not improved and is stuck at its original design? BSv's whole premise relies on cult thinking rather than logic. The design of first car, computer, TV etc etc etc have little to do with their current revisions and no one cares about ENIAC and steam powered cars. U in principle say that original Bitcoin (pre alterations incl Segwit) didn't work, had no enjines, no proper script whatsoever But that is the cult, that core / BS created , i.o. to sell u 2nd layer and script 'engines' cause it s still on the cult ticker btc. Take a step back, not Back, but back to the roots (yeah, it could get a cult) Jackass Guess this is a full agree in ur lang. Cheers |
|
|
|
Wait so Bitcoin = bad because Segwit is "indeed an alteration of the Bitcoin protocol"
BTC is suboptimal not merely because SegWit is an alteration, but because the SegWit Omnibus Changeset is a net negative alteration. but bcash Bsv = good because their shitty changes are "legitimate claim to a protocol change"
One of the things that makes BSV good is that it is being incrementally returned to the original Bitcoin protocol. Do try to keep up. Thus coming back to my comment about original design of planes not having jet engines and cars not having air bags etc... Can you provide any other technology which was not improved and is stuck at its original design? BSv's whole premise relies on cult thinking rather than logic. The design of first car, computer, TV etc etc etc have little to do with their current revisions and no one cares about ENIAC and steam powered cars. U in principle say that original Bitcoin (pre alterations incl Segwit) didn't work, had no enjines, no proper script whatsoever But that is the cult, that core / BS created , i.o. to sell u 2nd layer and script 'engines' cause it s still on the cult ticker btc. Take a step back, not Back, but back to the roots (yeah, it could get a cult) |
|
|
|
I wonder if BSV would like to join the alliance on https://nonfungiblealliance.org/Bringing together the NFT world !"As diverse and unique as the non-fungible space is, so are the visions, potentials, and opinions about it. Our goal is to provide a common platform for all non-fungible thinkers, enthusiasts, and creators. Join in and share your part, too. Some of the non-fungible perks: Exposure of your project - Early access to NFT solutions - Large community and network". BSV is just clean Bitcoin As A Maple Leaf is just clean gold Dunno why to join whatever. Btw: there is no CSW or other ppl needed in the equations above. So better be free and clean from anything else that is not really BitCoin. |
|
|
|
How could evidence of personal identity have anything whatsoever to do with evidence of protocol change? I'm not sure if you're trolling or trying to be serious.
Back at ya. See any evidence of SegWit in the white paper? No? Explicitly in front of your face. Willful dereliction of truthiness. SegWit was indeed an alteration of the Bitcoin protocol. Undeniably. There is really no way to argue otherwise. I am pretty confident the white paper doesn’t say anything about Turing completeness, legally enforceable smart contracts, token protocols, large data storage capability and all the other shit in Bitcoin SV marketing Yet interestingly, all fully supported in the 0.1 version of the Bitcoin protocol. You know, before the Cripple Rangers took control of the codebase. SegWit, on the other hand... Funny, eh? So what's the point you are trying to make? My mistake. I couldn't see any evidence of them in the white paper. Thank you for clarifying that it doesn't matter whether something is mentioned in the whitepaper. That is not what I said at all. Are you really that blind that you do not see what I am getting at? Even with your introduction of demonstrably flawed sidebars? The initial implementation of Bitcoin - 0.1 supports all the features you list. Without recourse to explicit enabling code. The initial implementation of Bitcoin -- and including up to and through the SegWit Omnibus Changeset Release -- did not support SegWit. Neither explicitly nor as an external implementation. Indeed, the implementation of SegWit was predicated on the most egregious change to the Bitcoin protocol ever enacted. The features you list did not / do not require a change to the Bitcoin protocol. SegWit did / does require a change to the Bitcoin protocol. So when you say "it doesn't matter whether something is mentioned in the whitepaper", you're neither right nor wrong. What matters is the protocol itself. SegWit was undeniably a change to that protocol. A rather significant one. Therefore, somewhat 'less Bitcoin-y' -- at least on this axis -- than other implementations which hew to the original. On the other hand, if some element is decidedly counter to the white paper (chain of digital signatures, anyone?), then that indeed does matter. It’s hard to keep track of what you were saying when you keep changing it. Bullshit. I've been consistent. You've been persistent in finding new words to stick in my mouth. wtf these new planes have jet engines, and cars have airbags?!?! But but none of this was in the original design!!! OMG - but still TCP/IP , smtp, SWIFT, FIX have not built in smart contracts - or did I miss u mix apples and crap? |
|
|
|
in germany the law and crypto regulation would change in 2020.
a regulated licensed crypto service may be useful for some, but not all germans or visitors are looking for such service.
nevertheless, it is interesting to see that this is now possible, some years ago bitcoin was declared illegal in germany.
I'm not aware that it was declared illegal at all. It was classified as property afair |
|
|
|
Open-source way for anyone to earn money by organizing links on the Bitcoin (SV) https://dir.sv/Intersting. Thx Ordering is PoW. It creates lower entropy on the layer, by increasing entropy of the universe. |
|
|
|
With a log plot u d see it bit clearer. I wonder when the small chunks will get caught by fees |
|
|
|
Ihr immer mit Eurem Bitcoin-Verbot. Selbst einzelne Länder, die sich an nem Bitcoin-Verbot versuchen/-t haben, scheitern damit kläglich und Ihr fantasiert Euch hier immernoch ein länderübergreifendes, oder gar globales Bitcoin Verbot zurecht. ..Geldwäsche und Terrorfinanzieung ... Silkrooad...
Die grossen (Banken, usw) mit viel Geld wissen dies, wehren sich gegen diese Art von Bitcoin, auch nach 10 Jahren noch...
Bitcoin ist Freiheit. Wenn das außer den Geldwäschern, Terrorfinanzierern, Drogendealern/-konsumenten/-baronen, Steuerhinterziehern und ein paar Nerds sonst niemand kapiert, is das auch kein Weltuntergang. Die Großen können sich da wehren, soviel sie wollen, ein anderes (unfreies) Bitcoin wird es (auch in 10 Jahren) nicht geben. Ohne ein Mindestmass and Regeln und Kontrolle wird es keine Freiheit geben. Anarchy ist keine Lösung für ein Zusammenleben in Freiheit, zuviel Regeln allerdings auch. Der Finanzsektor ist (leider) der am strengsten reguliete, der mit einem möglichst einfachen und neutralen 'unbeflecktem' Bitcoin Protocol sicher am besten 'aufgeräumt' werden kann, nicht jedoch mit ener bereits als 'BösCoin' gelabelter Version. Das kommt nicht durch... |
|
|
|
Why didn't he just use Bitcoin signmessage command?Genius in simplicity and all that.
he did do that but since he is fake and doesn't have the private keys, he tried to fool people into thinking the fake signature he provided was real. to do that he contacted a lot of different personalities including bitcoin core developers to back him up, everyone showed him the middle finger except Gavin lol. The signing dose not prove it. It is just a 'little' part of , an good indication. Would you ask any PhD or CEO or ... To come up with the prove u little boy might accept the the guy has done PhD or is CEO, ore anything he seems to be? These ppl prove P2P most of the things not,to trolls Nope. The prove was always in the pudding. Do your own due dilligence is always recommended, PoW Let me guess.You are a Craig Wright and BSV supporter? I support a clean simple unchanged stable and open scalable Bitcoin protocol. It happened that BSV is this and CSW is one of the major speakers for it. Hope this is not a problem for you |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
