Admitted what? That my nick is jbreher?

Curses! You caught me red handed! My vile plot has been foiled!

Yeah! Don't forget about...  unnhh  .... nevermind.

Got corresponding standing orders for BCH. If you can't see the sense in that, you're dropping a notch or three in my estimation.

Several corrections:
- I never claimed BTC is shit.
- I never claimed the BTC dev team is shit.
- I receive no renumeration for my advocacy of Bitcoin Cash. Therefor, by definition, I am not a shill.
- Bitcoin Cash. Bcash is a different coin altogether.

How many misrepresentations are you able to fit in one line? Torque may be leading the competition.

Fine. I already pulled all the fiat I can use back in the $18K-19K range. And I have standing buys ... umm ... standing by, all the way down to your postulated $8K and yet further below. I think your prognostication is ludicrous, but if it comes to pass, I will have that much more BTC in my pocket. For the next inevitable pump to $50K, dontchaknow.

We really have two arguments going here. One is: what is objectively correct to raise the value price of Byteball; and the other is what can be done with it.

Let's deal with the second one first, as it is shorter and more direct. I already gave you the answer: https://github.com/byteball/byteball. Go forth and forkify thyself.

With that out of the way, let us discuss the first. You claim that 'the community wants a lower denomination'. First, where is your data? Seems to me all you have to point to is some handful of disembodied names on some forum on some corner of the internet.

And you decry the lack of decentralization. Frankly, I agree with you here. Though I find your specific worry to be trivial - certainly tonych's control over all the validators is a fundamentally more severe problem than some 'control' over the denomination. But again, in practical matters, tonych has pointed out that the fundamental unit is a byte. The fact that it is typically discussed as Gbytes is a triviality. You want decentralization? Lobby the exchanges to make the change. Get off your ass and do it yourself.

Amuses me that you go on about decentralization while pleading with the 'central point of control' to make a change.

And WhoTF are you to claim that "Tonys actions outside of his coding are actually damaging to the project."? The way I see it, he has put scads of money in my pocket. You? Not so much.

And while you seem to assert that decentralization is a necessary property for a coin to succeed, the counterexample of XRP's #2 market cap quite clearly disproves your assertion.

"Also let's get some polls for BB so we can tell really how many people want things and dont want it."

OK, now you are on to something. Without hard data, your claim of 'what people want' is mere bullshit. So figure out a way to implement a scientifically-valid means of polling the community, and run it. Perhaps with unassailable data, tonych can be persuaded. Or are you waiting for the 'single centralized point' to do that work for you?

I get it. The centralization is sub-optimal. I actually agree with you. What can be done about it? Tonych's position is rather clear. Quit whingeing and do something.

With all due respect.

Hmm. So if people can buy AMPs using Changelly, who is the counterparty doing the selling?

Litecoin, Tethers, tabs...

Cracks me up how you core acolytes are always advancing ways to use something other than Bitcoin.

---

From what I can gather, he stole everyone's value in that weird alternate reality game of his, and went insane again. Perhaps not in that order. He's been levitating and such. Believes he has a direct conduit to some supreme being somewhat in the judeo-christian mold, but pliable to his personal desires.

Too bad - he was quite the asset to the community when he was lucid.

---

Interesting perspective. Worthy of ponderation.

---

If you find the fact that Bitcoin is being used less to be a good sign, then I guess so. Personally, I think usage is a good thing.

---

Better yet, Ripple is down 1/3 on the day.

The start of the drop was a also a spike in volume -- on GDAX at least. Volume going down. If this is systemic, we should snap back soon.

Edit: dropping volume was a fake. Dependent clause therefor also suspect. drat.

---

No. While CMC and others display the USD value of the various assets, most of them are fundamentally denominated in BTC. So when BTC gets the sniffles, they all get sick.

---

Haha. 'No-body's perfect'

https://youtu.be/CYUfPTeE0DM?t=31s

Yet Byteball has a market cap of about $450 Million USD. Perhaps this is prima facie evidence that decentralization is not necessarily the be-all, end-all in crypto value?


Yes...


This assertion is made, bereft of any evidence to support it. Why do you claim A is the cause of B?

Perhaps those so insistent they know better than tony how to 'make this coin a success' should fork the code and create a new coin. Here ya go: https://github.com/byteball/byteball

What makes it funny is the fact that both paragraphs are 100% true and correct.

---

I doubt it. I acknowledge the possibility.

OTOH, what difference does it make?

---

I use Shift.

---

Bullshit. SHA256 is a block cipher. Miners' competitiveness are not affected by block size.

---

Nah. If such a thing happens, it would be but a tempest in a teapot. Sure, Bitcoin price would take a dive. Maybe even 50%. But then it would be over. And the specter of such a possibility (which any intelligent market participant should already be factoring in) would no longer be holding the price down. Half- recovered within a week. Fully recovered within a month. And thereforth climbing at an even higher rate.

You're focused upon the wrong bogeyman.

---

Good question. The AXA-backed-Blockstream-dominated core hasn't even defaulted their client to segwit transactions as of yet. I wonder why that might be?

The ignorance -- it burns.

Publicly, even.

smh

Pretty good actually. Moving a big chunk from Bitcoin Segwit to Bitcoin Cash has worked out splendidly.

Thanks for asking.

As if we needed further proof of svenny's ignoramusness.

What a maroon.

Don't be obtuse. garzik created the ATA/SATA subsystem that runs the majority of the servers that constitute 'The Internet'.

We didn't need to invent grand new designs. We just needed to rescue Satoshi's vision from blockstream/core's misguided changes.

...and I chortled. XD


OK, that was funny too. Rude, but funny. XD

---

Yup, Ver lost his temper with some asshole who repeatedly accused him (without any evidence to back it up, of course) of hiring shills. And within minutes issued a public apology for his poor behavior.

Meantime, we have the oh-so-cultured and oh-so-refined self-reinforcing BTC WO in-crowd spouting shit like:

'Peter is mostly smoking Roger's dick, and seems to like it.'

And laughing to each other about it like junior high bullies on some shitty playground.

Get some perspective, FFS.

---

See, the funny thing is that it is you yammering apes that keep wanting to make it about Ver And Wu. We Bitcoin Cash advocates, advocate for the philosophy and technology. All y'all gots in your back pocket is dragging these guys' names through the mud. Meanwhile, Bitcoin Cash keeps soldiering on.

Just no. It is nine years old. It is a chain fork, you ninny.

Sour grapes? What are you smoking? They told you the condition upon which they would adopt Segwit (this of course being S2X), and you kicked them in the teeth after activation. WTF do you expect?


In the meantime, you have gotten it wrong - oh so wrong.

I used to believe that too. However, with Bitcoin's market dominance dropping so low, I am no longer so sure about that. Pity.

Do you not understand Bitcoin? Bitcoin runs on greed. Creating a way to channel each person's greed to serve the system as a whole was Satoshi's central innovation.