|
We do not need to repeat all that over and over.
This is about bitcoin cash here and now.
This is not about SW and LN. We know how that happend to btc.
Miners had done most of their scaling tasks long time ago. They were ready to go for bigger blocks.
Blockstopp stepped in and fudded around to fear the miners and now btc 'needs' to run little recon nodes for everybody (lol) to pari against 'evil' miners. (Divide and conquer at work)
Mearchants were ready as well and tried the SW2X... aaand stopped by brainstoppers
Bitcoin Cash was ready for the full industrial scale, HF, on-chain scaling and open dev - including all parts in the crypto world (ex Blockstoppers)
So let it compete and see what will attract the masses over the next years.
|
|
|
|
|
So this 'tiny' percentage ended up to be SW.
Sure any other input of BS can be maby ignored, but not SW, the splitting point.
How much is the weighted percentage of that, you smallbrainer over there?
You still are lying any shit into the world because you need.
|
|
|
|
does bcc have privacy features
Roadmapped. |
|
|
|
Lol. Tekky is getting really desperate , got triggered  Consult some self edit shit one shitcoinpages. |
|
|
|
Go ahead, build things, use Bitcoin Cash as it should be used! Gaming is one good way of use - be fair and share the fun  |
|
|
|
Well, yes - let's do (anti-bitcoin style!) and concentrate on a single / central individual ( Cobra in this case) .. to betters split and bash ?
You say that, but you also say you are free to believe what you want - If things go for Satoshi's Bitcoin - I'm with you. that. Isn't saying that you would only follow "Satoshi's Bitcoin" also a centralization phrase? That is the worst kind of attitude to have in Bitcoin. It's the same with how the Ethereum community follows Vitalik Buterin unquestionably like a god. Bitcoin (Cash) has lots of perspectives - removing the max_block_size parameter from the consensus protocol level might be just the lowest hanging fruit here.
That does not make it better. Why does nobody really know how many Satoshi was ?   Is that your argument? Really? IMHO this is Bitcoin > we should not care of single guys here, get the thing decentralized as much as the competition allows. Then drop the argument about "we forked to bigger blocks because we are following Satoshi's vision". Satoshi is, in essence, only a single guy. A centralization figure. But if you continue arguing for "Satoshi's vision", then I will argue that "Satoshi's vision" is for the Lightning Network. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834752.0Freedom of choice You make up your own mind, Cobra does, that's fine. As long as it is about Bitcoin for the masses (un-banked inclusion) - fine with me Figure out how much complexity of the base protocol is 'ok' to reach these masses. and paypal, visa, mastercard is a "freedom of choice"....  For all the unbanked ? - no |
|
|
|
BCH - No Games ( no 1MB, SW, LN, 2ndL, ...) Just Sports (hit the street when You want, on chain) |
|
|
|
SW too complicated LN too complicated SW + LN too complex BCH easy and straight forward. Adoption happens here look e.g. https://acceptbitcoin.cashDo your own math where this might extrapolate to. |
|
|
|
Well, yes - let's do (anti-bitcoin style!) and concentrate on a single / central individual ( Cobra in this case) .. to betters split and bash ?
You say that, but you also say you are free to believe what you want - If things go for Satoshi's Bitcoin - I'm with you. that. Isn't saying that you would only follow "Satoshi's Bitcoin" also a centralization phrase? That is the worst kind of attitude to have in Bitcoin. It's the same with how the Ethereum community follows Vitalik Buterin unquestionably like a god. Bitcoin (Cash) has lots of perspectives - removing the max_block_size parameter from the consensus protocol level might be just the lowest hanging fruit here.
That does not make it better. Why does nobody really know how many Satoshi was ? Is that your argument? Really? IMHO this is Bitcoin > we should not care of single guys here, get the thing decentralized as much as the competition allows. Then drop the argument about "we forked to bigger blocks because we are following Satoshi's vision". Satoshi is, in essence, only a single guy. A centralization figure. But if you continue arguing for "Satoshi's vision", then I will argue that "Satoshi's vision" is for the Lightning Network. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834752.0Freedom of choice You make up your own mind, Cobra does, that's fine. As long as it is about Bitcoin for the masses (un-banked inclusion) - fine with me Figure out how much complexity of the base protocol is 'ok' to reach these masses. |
|
|
|
Well, yes - let's do (anti-bitcoin style!) and concentrate on a single / central individual ( Cobra in this case) .. to betters split and bash ?
You say that, but you also say you are free to believe what you want - If things go for Satoshi's Bitcoin - I'm with you. that. Isn't saying that you would only follow "Satoshi's Bitcoin" also a centralization phrase? That is the worst kind of attitude to have in Bitcoin. It's the same with how the Ethereum community follows Vitalik Buterin unquestionably like a god. Bitcoin (Cash) has lots of perspectives - removing the max_block_size parameter from the consensus protocol level might be just the lowest hanging fruit here.
That does not make it better. Why does nobody really know how many Satoshi was ? IMHO this is Bitcoin > we should not care of single guys here, get the thing decentralized as much as the competition allows. I believe we need only a 'central' money for 'all', such hints to a central crypto ccy and yes - no space for ETH (maybe having a single guy there could be a reason for a failure?) and other copies. What computers and the internet can do, to serve these 'all' -> one perfect crypto should do and I fear BTC (++) has issues to achieve that - Cobra is one guy seeing this now and openly chats about + getting smacked. |
|
|
|
Tor project accepts BCH now  BTC costs - lol Is this for real? How can their business model be sustainable without transaction fees? Paying with CASH should be 0 cost - or are you charged sometime ? Paying electronically should be 0 cost ... Paying with crypto .... hu ? Why fees ? -> Shit coin ! ->> BITCOIN CASH is the correct sustainable solution. |
|
|
|
Tor project accepts BCH now BTC costs - lol |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
