and confusing innocents who are not privy to the closed door shenanigans that took place.
A vanishingly small number. And completely inadvertent. If you're gonna get involved in crypto without doing your due diligence, you're gonna have a bad time. No matter what particular coin. for you to suggest that people are not( still) confused about this issue is ludicrous. Are you seriously trying to claim that anyone that spent more than a Superbowl's worth of time looking into it cannot tell the difference between Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Segwit? You're not being very flattering to the typical bcash holder. I don't follow. Exactly where are you finding the notion put forth that Bitcoin Segwit and Bitcoin Cash are the exact same asset? The average guy from the street has no idea what the difference is. That's the point. The average guy from the street has no idea what Bitcoin is, period. Again, I fail to see the point. If you're gonna get involved in crypto without doing your due diligence, you're gonna have a bad time. No matter what particular coin. The forks are clearly delineated. Bitcoin Segwit is proud to tout its inclusion of segwit. Bitcoin Cash is proud to tout its exclusion of segwit. These differentiators are not hard to discover. |
|
|
|
and confusing innocents who are not privy to the closed door shenanigans that took place.
A vanishingly small number. And completely inadvertent. If you're gonna get involved in crypto without doing your due diligence, you're gonna have a bad time. No matter what particular coin. for you to suggest that people are not( still) confused about this issue is ludicrous. Are you seriously trying to claim that anyone that spent more than a Superbowl's worth of time looking into it cannot tell the difference between Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Segwit? You're not being very flattering to the typical bcash holder. I don't follow. Exactly where are you finding the notion put forth that Bitcoin Segwit and Bitcoin Cash are the exact same asset? |
|
|
|
and confusing innocents who are not privy to the closed door shenanigans that took place.
A vanishingly small number. And completely inadvertent. If you're gonna get involved in crypto without doing your due diligence, you're gonna have a bad time. No matter what particular coin. for you to suggest that people are not( still) confused about this issue is ludicrous. Are you seriously trying to claim that anyone that spent more than a Superbowl's worth of time looking into it cannot tell the difference between Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Segwit? You're either highly naive, or dishonest to say the least and I think you're smart enough not to fall into the former category. I'm pretty sure that everybody on this thread knows how the masses react to branding and aggressive marketing. Really? Just how much time do you think is required for a newcomer to spend in order to clearly delineate the difference between Bitcoin Segwit and Bitcoin Cash? |
|
|
|
More importantly it allowed the Bcash team to premine Bcash under everyone’s noses.
idonotthinkthatwordmeanswhatyouthinkitmeans.png A premine is when a coin is mined by a select few while forcibly excluding all others. From inception, BitcoinCash was available to be mined to anyone that wanted to direct hashpower to it. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin.com is not a scam, it is a URL. What is scammy about that? Further, in what way does the existence of such make me a scammer?
jbreher, just stop it. By definition in the Whitepaper Bitcoin is the chain with greatest accumulated PoW. I disagree. It is the longest valid chain. What is valid is up to the collective of users, and different users can have different preferences. Luckily, there is a clear leader in terms of number of users and market cap. However, if bitcoin (core) and bitcoin cash had an equal amount of supporters, we might have a hard time determining which one would be named bitcoin. The one that supports pre-fork coins. This is not difficult. What I have been trying to get you to realize is that both Bitcoin Segwit and Bitcoin Cash support pre-fork coins. This is not difficult. |
|
|
|
The bottom line is that if the wallet you use can't process pre-fork coins then it is not bitcoin.
Relevance? Everyone who had coins before the fork. I still don't see what you're getting at. Look we all see through you. Just fuck off.
Haha. See through me? What do you see on the other side? Can you substantiate it with anything other than your superman x-ray specs? Just fuck off yourself. This is the problem with arguing on the internet. If we were all meeting in person, this is the point where you would be punched in the face for being unable to take a hint. And not even necessarily by me. People like you never admit fault or that the opposition has a point, you just keep talking and talking until people get tired. Doesn't work in the real world, does work where no physical contact is possible. This is your home field. The thing is, even if we were all meeting in person, I might be tolerated in some small fashion. But even people who don't like me don't like you. You are simply not welcome here. waaah. |
|
|
|
Really, why are we arguing ANYTHING when CONSENSUS already spoke?
Well, it would seem to be because you barged into a conversation where I was trying to get my accuser to clarify their accusation. We wouldn't be arguing anything at all if you had not. BTAIM, your points all seem to come down to some magic power of consensus. Is it your assertion that any use of a coin other than that gifted with the consensus of the majority is inherently a scam? If not, I fail to see what your point is. If so, I'll just call you a petty tyrant for forcing others to conform to your desires and be on my way. |
|
|
|
and confusing innocents who are not privy to the closed door shenanigans that took place.
A vanishingly small number. And completely inadvertent. If you're gonna get involved in crypto without doing your due diligence, you're gonna have a bad time. No matter what particular coin. for you to suggest that people are not( still) confused about this issue is ludicrous. Are you seriously trying to claim that anyone that spent more than a Superbowl's worth of time looking into it cannot tell the difference between Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Segwit? |
|
|
|
controlled by roger ver
Explain in what manner specifically that Bitcoin Cash is controlled by Roger Ver. Our be exposed as yet one more liar. |
|
|
|
nobody actually likes bitcoin cash
Your statement is clearly false. you are hired by him am sure he has hired many people to keep posting crap offcourse your a worker for him a slaveYour statement is false. Again. You are a liar. People who have reality on their side do not have to lie to try to make a point. You are pointless. You have not said anything about the video posted here a bit back of your fakoshi openly saying Bitcoin nodes should only be run by banks and corporations Do you have any thoughts on this that one of your great leaders intent to let banks and corporations run Bitcoin cash Your are correct that I have not said yet anything about that video. What do you believe is relevant in regards to this factoid? More importantly, where is your evidence that 'you are hired by him'? Obviously having none, you are exposed as a cretin who will make shit up in order to try to score a point in what could otherwise be a legitimate argument. Everyone reading along now sees this. Congratulations in demonstrating yourself to be a liar. What makes you think I recognize 'your fakoshi' (I assume you are referring to Craig Wright? Why not just say so in order to remove the ambiguity?) as 'one of [my] great leaders'? While I don't agree that all but banks and corporations should be prevented from running fully-validating, non-mining wallets, I do recognize that such non-mining entities add no value to the network itself. Whether Bitcoin Cash or Bitcoin Segwit. edit: I just went back and found the misattribution that I think you are likely referring to: https://twitter.com/StopAndDecrypt/status/965429695071301632This is rich - CSW does not in this short video snippet ever say anything resembling 'only banks and corporations should run nodes'. So not only are you a liar, you are standing on the shoulders of previous liars. Are you sure about that pretty sure it's Craig    I don't dispute that it is Craig. However, in the linked video, he does not state what has been misattributed to him. He never says that only banks and corporations should be allowed to run so-called 'nodes'. |
|
|
|
The bottom line is that if the wallet you use can't process pre-fork coins then it is not bitcoin.
Relevance? Everyone who had coins before the fork. I still don't see what you're getting at. Look we all see through you. Just fuck off.
Haha. See through me? What do you see on the other side? Can you substantiate it with anything other than your superman x-ray specs? Just fuck off yourself. |
|
|
|
What is "EDA"? My brain is not converting this.
I assume HairyMaclairy was referring to the Emergency Difficulty Adjustment. |
|
|
|
The bottom line is that if the wallet you use can't process pre-fork coins then it is not bitcoin.
Relevance? |
|
|
|
Why are we going over the same old BCash nonsense again?
Because Last of the V8s has publicly accused me of being a scammer. I challenged him/her to support the charge. And he/she has sat back while a predictable team of nattering nabobs of negativity have charged in to conflate that simple idea with a global 'but muh BCash is a scam!!!11!11!!!' mantra. I would have been happy to just let sleeping dogs lie. But when accused of being a scammer, I am going to defend myself (as if I should even have to). |
|
|
|
scammers of cypherdoc/jbreher class
Exactly what do you assert I have done to scam anyone? Pretend Bcash was a helpful and useful upgrade to Bitcoin instead of admitting it is a pre-mined (EDA) scam of the first order. We don’t readily forget your fraud nor Peter R nor any other of your pals. Let's unpack this. In what way is Bitcoin Cash a scam? They tried to confuse investors saying it was *Bitcoin*, parasiting on the Bitcoin "branding" with bad faith. Bullshit. 1) At this time the fork occurred, Bitcoin Cash had as legitimate a claim on the name 'Bitcoin' as did Bitcoin Segwit -- especially what with The Bitcoin Segwit Omnibus Changeset being the single greatest change ever perpetrated upon Bitcoin. Simply appending the 'Cash' modifier can be seen as a favor to the other fork. 2) While there may have been a couple isolated incidents of people confusing Bitcoin Cash with Bitcoin Segwit due to the shared 'Bitcoin' portion of the name, they are miniscule. There was no attempt to confuse. There was no bad faith. 3) The word 'Bitcoin' is not a trademark of Bitcoin Segwit, Bitcoin Core, Blockstream, or any other entity. There are no ownership rights to be stolen. 4) 'Parasiting' is a laughable charge. The Bitcoin Cash community reacted in the only manner available to them to do what was in their eye what was necessary to save Bitcoin. 1) Wrong. Bitcoin, following the established consensus rules set from the beginning, did an upgrade to Segwit. Some people, going AGAINST that consensus decided to create a fork with a bunch of UNconsensuated rules (like the difficulty change algo) so it wasn't even some rogue people deciding to maintain the previous branch AGAINST the newly consesuated rules, BUT A COMPLETELY NEW AND DIFFERENT THING. <- The point here is, anyways, CONSENSUATED OR NOT, according to the pre-established rules. "They vote with their CPU proof-of-worker, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them. Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism." - S. Nakamoto 2) The bad faith was in some prominent proponents of that unconsensuated rogue fork PUBLICLY INSISTING that it was "THE REAL BITCOIN". And don't make start on arguing about all the rest of statements like it was going to be the predominant chain, etc etc....
At the time of the forks, Bitcoin Cash had every right to make that claim. It ceded that right when it was unable to gain a greater accumulated PoW. Not before that was demonstrated. 3) I was very prudent in chosing "branding" instead of BRAND, as I am well aware of the implications of both concepts.
Perhaps you can explain how you think there is any proprietary 'branding' violation here. 4) Parasiting is exactly what hapenned here. I didn't even argue if it was or wasn't a trademark infringent, but an intentional malicious "parasiting" sure did happen.
I would counter that Bitcoin Segwit has parasited upon Bitcoin in exactly the same manner. |
|
|
|
He is not here to learn, he is only here to troll.
Neither. I am here to illuminate my point of view. |
|
|
|
Its all about the stolen brand identity
By definition, it is impossible to steal something which is free to use. Indignance aside, you have no leg to stand on here. and confusing innocents who are not privy to the closed door shenanigans that took place.
A vanishingly small number. And completely inadvertent. If you're gonna get involved in crypto without doing your due diligence, you're gonna have a bad time. No matter what particular coin. |
|
|
|
scammers of cypherdoc/jbreher class
Exactly what do you assert I have done to scam anyone? Pretend Bcash was a helpful and useful upgrade to Bitcoin instead of admitting it is a pre-mined (EDA) scam of the first order. We don’t readily forget your fraud nor Peter R nor any other of your pals. Let's unpack this. In what way is Bitcoin Cash a scam? Hahahahaha go fuck yourself. Hahahaha. Fuck you very much. Bitcoin.com,
Bitcoin.com is not a scam, it is a URL. What is scammy about that? Further, in what way does the existence of such make me a scammer? EDA,
The EDA was shown to be an effective manner for a coin to fork off. In what way is that a scam? Do you assert that miners _owe_ the Bitcoin Segwit fork to operate only upon it? In what way does the existence of the EDA make me a scammer? Coinbase withholding,
You're going to have to explain what you mean by this, as I have no idea. spam attacks,
Do you assert that a blockchain is responsible for the actions of individuals? What is your evidence that such spam attacks actually occurred? That they were perpetrated by 'Bitcoin Cash'? What is it about spam attacks that makes them scams? What context makes me responsible for such spam attacks? sock puppets,
Like Adam Back's admitted 'team of narrative correctors'? Incidentally, which sock puppets? Are sock puppets inherently scams? And in what way does this existence of such make me a scammer? massive paid social media campaigns,
Like Adam Back's admitted 'team of narrative correctors'? For that matter, where's your evidence that such have occurred? What is it about social media campaigns that inherently make them scams? And of course, in what way does the existence of such make me a scammer? “Bcash is the real Bitcoin”.
At the time of the forks, Bitcoin Cash had as legitimate a claim on the title as did Bitcoin Segwit. Indeed, the only reason it does not currently have the title is that there is greater accumulated PoW on the Bitcoin Segwit fork. What with Satoshi's definition and all. Where is the scam in that? (I still hold out hope that this will change). I’m not going to spend all day spelling out the many and varied ways Bcash is a steaming fraud. Now stop playing dumb and asking “innocent” questions and go back to r/BTC
I don't much participate in any reddit fora. Thanks anyhow. |
|
|
|
Downvoted the vid and closed it just from the way he looks and the first two seconds. What a fucking creep.
That's enlightened. Ignore the message because of the way the messenger looks, and the fact that in the first two seconds, he introduces himself by name? You do realize who this is? You actually can judge a book by its cover, you know? As with anything else, some people are good at it and some are so bad that they refuse to believe it's possible, but I seem to have become pretty good at it of late. You do realize who this is? Other than 'CEO of Bitcoin Cash' - a title obviously created just to tweak idiots. Some semblance of his past accomplishments maybe? He's a bcasher. Which fits with my general impression of him. That makes him, at best, a useful idiot. Again. Enlightened. /s |
|
|
|
scammers of cypherdoc/jbreher class
Exactly what do you assert I have done to scam anyone? Pretend Bcash was a helpful and useful upgrade to Bitcoin instead of admitting it is a pre-mined (EDA) scam of the first order. We don’t readily forget your fraud nor Peter R nor any other of your pals. Let's unpack this. In what way is Bitcoin Cash a scam? They tried to confuse investors saying it was *Bitcoin*, parasiting on the Bitcoin "branding" with bad faith. Bullshit. 1) At this time the fork occurred, Bitcoin Cash had as legitimate a claim on the name 'Bitcoin' as did Bitcoin Segwit -- especially what with The Bitcoin Segwit Omnibus Changeset being the single greatest change ever perpetrated upon Bitcoin. Simply appending the 'Cash' modifier can be seen as a favor to the other fork. 2) While there may have been a couple isolated incidents of people confusing Bitcoin Cash with Bitcoin Segwit due to the shared 'Bitcoin' portion of the name, they are miniscule. There was no attempt to confuse. There was no bad faith. 3) The word 'Bitcoin' is not a trademark of Bitcoin Segwit, Bitcoin Core, Blockstream, or any other entity. There are no ownership rights to be stolen. 4) 'Parasiting' is a laughable charge. The Bitcoin Cash community reacted in the only manner available to them to do what was in their eye what was necessary to save Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
