backhatcoiner wants to make his core god(core brand name (blockstream administrerd: adam back)) be the inventor not satoshi (facepalm)

satoshi was one person who used the satoshi name = satoshi is 1 person
satoshi wrote the first version, adam back did not
adam back did not write any code for bitcoin 0_AD-200X_AD

and here is an analogy
if a caveman invented the wheel does not mean a caveman invented the first car
if a Egyptian's invented glass does not mean Egyptian's invented the first car

also adam backs hashcash is not the exact same as bitcoins PoW

satoshi took inspiration and idea's from many things and tweaked them, emphasis: changed them
..and brought them together in his(satoshis) unique way to fit together as something new..
thus a new invention(much like a wheel is not a car)(much like a rubber and metal wheel is not a stone wheel)
 
thus satoshi invented bitcoin and
adam backs idea is inspired, but not actually in it. not one line of code wrote by adam back of hashcash was in bitcoin.
hashcash used a different SHA, different way to churn nonce.
the data content being hashed is not about email
the end result requirement is different format and requirement and length

directly to blackhatcoiner and acolytes that sound like him:
stop imagining core founder adam back as your god.. he did not invent bitcoin. he was not even coding bitcoin when the first versions of bitcoin were released.
you will not get rich by showing core devotion.. you infact decided to leave this forum when your mixer junk spam adverts stopped financing you, but came back trying to get a pay day by now spam adverts of gambling

if you need to earn via sigspam, wise up that years of cultish ass kissing didnt pay, they didnt even message you in this forum asking/demanding you stay. they let you leave or didnt realise you left.. wake up to those facts.. years of blind cultish loyalty did not reap you any rewards

you really have been brainwashed into a cult.. try to escape it or you will become as bad as the CSW believers

d5000 for someone like you thats been around long enough to have had the time to learn enough, you yet again show you dont know enough, by contradicting yourself and by then saying obsurd notions

first of all i have been talking about the funky junk being able to be added if segwit activated since core proposed segwit back in 2016.. creating new soft(open/un-format required)opcodes that were treated as valid without checking data after opcode.. since 2016..
so no its not about taproot.. i never mentioned EVER taproot starting it all, taproot is just the prime example/demo/effect/result of the previous exploit softening has caused since 2017, where years later taproot is the result/example.. not cause

secondly. stampchain. is not complicated. its just multisig of EG 1of2 where it needs one signer key and the other key is junk data
(funny part is i think it was me that gave them the idea in early ordinals days, to use multisig instead of witness metadata/op_returns)

op_return and stampchain does not create 4mb of memes..
op return is limited to 80 bytes and stamps have 20byte thus leaner then the meme junk
and the great thing about code. code can create rules.. as thats the beauty of it
code to limit arbitrary data to keep bitcoin clean for its main intended purpose.. a purpose you seem to have forgot
(and no dont reply that you think bitcoin should be free to become a junk data library/comic book store of images)

i think you really dont understand why bitcoin was such a great solution to digital money concepts of the early years..
i know you want arbitrary junk data as it makes bitcoin annoying and helps you to promote other networks people should use to get away from the annoyances.. but how about you stop promoting other networks and start to think of what is best for bitcoin.. via fixes to the annoyances. rather then wanting the annoyances to continue just to promote user exits as the only solution you could find

hardening the rules again actually means core devs cant just supplant new stuff which then by default require people to rush into using core as sole reference updated code to stay fairly 'fully' again after they change things.. thus keeping them on power
it stops core from being so lax. instead hardening the rules would require core to be scrutinised more pre feature operation, to then have the community then see there is nothing that could go wrong before core do anything.. as it should be

and it then also requires core to hope what they make meets the standards/benefits the community see as a good thing/to see its merits..
meaning core have to actually explain things and show things rather then throw things in and see what sticks

which another brand could then also publish its own proposals and community can check its merits too and there wont be a REKT campaign fear of 'dont use software as its trojan.." of sily fear campaigns. but instead actual fair adoption due to the activation not happening pre majority thus safe to start allowing different nodes onto the network with different feature offering/proposals with no threat level of any brand instantly changing stuff

as for your willingness to not want core to have network readiness as you think it will hinder cores innovativeness/creativity .. well maybe that will kick them up the ass to motivate them to actually make something network benefit worthy, rather than things sponsorship worth

but i do gotta laugh how you dont want nodes checking everything but then try to refer to nodes not checking everything as "full"
pure comedy

stand in your street when it rains
notice the rain does not land on soil, but on concrete/asphalt
notice it does get given time to evaporate, but runs off into drains and sewers and then into the sea

if you dont sell you dont lose

so yes buy low sell high and hold inbetween if the price goes down.
bitcoin has a 4 year cycle with a new All Time High predicted for 2025.
so buy and hold. dont sell at a loss
you only lose when you sell at a loss. so if price is down hold what you have and treat the lower price as discount to accumulate more

..
you can only "lose it all" if there was a major bug in bitcoin code that just breaks bitcoin and makes it unusable.
bitcoins code is open to read and people do read and check the code. bitcoin is actually more sturdy due to being code, compared to say a company which can go bankrupt due to many factors

bitcoin has more longevity security than a company, which is why its being treated as a long term investment unlike those corporation boom and bust scenarios of the last couple decades

..
also once you buy it, transfer it out of etoro and store it in a independent wallet (something you cant do with shares)
that way if e-toro(a company) goes bankrupt or decides not to be a broker. you have your coin separate from them thus cant be affected by them

carbon emissions and environment is the advert to poke at peoples hearts and minds to get motivated to act..
reducing the demand on reserves is the underlying reason

we(im from the uk) actually had more smog and carbon in the air pre 1900. london and the UK as with most countries during the victorian/industrial era/wild west days had a problem with smog long before the carbon agenda was a thing.. and we cleaned our act up long before carbon agenda was a thing

410parts per million in air quality is not a crisis amount heck if you actually done proper air compositions of different days depending on water (dry or wet rainy day) the carbon count swings alot more then the small amount they make us fear.
410-425 is not a threat.
its just a reason to make us fear something we do not understand due to lack of clarity, to motivate us into taxations and inflation thinking its all for the good of the environment, whilst that same money fund profiting businesses to diversify away from a dwindling supply reserve, for THEIR corporate preservation

---

another resource crisis is the fresh water crisis
yes they advertise droughts. but they do not reveal the cause

instead of rain falling on soil land and irrigating land to grow. sequestering both water* and carbon.. we humans have built cities and reservoirs to capture said water before it gets to soak into the land

so now most of the "water cycle" funnels through pipes we made, avoiding nature and just going through our systems
when people use too much water and it just goes through sewers out to sea. it avoids nature.

thus soil does not get water from natural streams, rivers due to dams. water doesnt flow over land. due to utility pipes

we see reservoirs empty due to over use and the lack of soil soak which means less landmass able to offer evaporation to complete the cycle again

*lack of rain = lack of cooling of the air. lack of clouds to shade us from the sun..
yep lack of cloud has more 'global warming' impact than the misleading carbon per million count, (it doesnt count air content accurately based on real dry/wet days. but changes numbers to uniform the numbers as if everydays was dry day(fudging the numbers))

hydro carbons will still have a niche need  for the next 500 years
however reserves of fossil hydrocarbons at current rate of depletion only have 50 years reserves
so the burning/refining needs to come down by 95% to leave a legacy to future generations

so yes the elites do want to preserve the resources
but to promote reserve shortage as a 'demand' crisis for future generations was not good enough, so making it a 'health-eco' global problem of human survival in this century, became the promotion


thus when de carbonising the western world via renewables. they then do not want to give the middle eastern/developing countries their resource, lands(where reserves are) back to them for them to deplete the reserves. in short they dont want africa/india middle east just burning reserves if the west stop buying as much

i never even touched any fork of bitcoin nor do i advertise or promote other networks pretending to be bitcoin... yet you have with your mentors shoddy subnetwork he wants to migrate bitcoiners over to and where he wants to stop people buying daily goods on the actual bitcoin network,, which you then recite

you actually do have a mentor.
other people have independent minds to think for themselves and say many things
my opinions are my own. my insults to you are my own unique insults.
my words to you are my own
my thought on development are my own and differ to the ones you quote and different to the ones you also quote others of being

yet your words, insults and lame posts are just words heard by your mentor before you, thus your words are not original, nor are your insults

you should atleast try to be original and unique and independent.. that should be a minimum

pease learn the meaning of independence.. it will not only help you in life, but help you understand what decentralisation is
you just acting a slave to someone elses trusted character and characters(words) is an example of centralisation which you adore

you would rather have code weakened, softened and backdoored to allow one central group control to slide things in without network readiness.. to then require their political decision of needing them to close their exploits, which they refuse..
your acceptance of this policy will not benefit you or others in the long run

dont treat devs as immortal gods you should trust by default and allow them to do as they please without oversight or scrutiny. learn to scrutinise devs that have grabbed the powerhouse of being te "sole reference client"
we should use code to harden the rules to protect the network, not soften the rule to allow a central point of failure do things that caused congestion and bloat... and pretend they didnt know of the repercussions of their error, i was telling them since 2016

if you have more trust in core devs, than the actual code(due to you not reading code, thus blindly trust those that wrote it)
then you have much to learn and have had, but still have much time to learn from your mistakes

OP knows rationally to expect MAYBE near to $70k by year end.. but people like him try to shout 2x of rationality it make people feel confident to buy at $70k at year end thinking they can get $150k in days(this year).. whilst people like the OP always intended to sell at $70k at year end(this year)

we seen it many times before, like in 2021 when a price was at $70k people were shouting keep buying it will get to $140k whilst those shouting buy were hoping others would buy so they can sell at $70k in 2021

so whenever you see anyone scream large extreme numbers that dont fit any previous pattern.. half their amount and thats what to actually expect the screamers to want to sell for

its got nothing to do with turning in currency to a bank to swap tainted bank notes for fresh crisp bank notes

its the FACT/law that by putting it in a trash bin and putting it at a roadside you are renouncing your ownership of the contents, by presenting it as available to be collected by a trash company/service
(as oppose to littering(just throwing it on the ground))

as soon as the trash truck arrives and puts that trash into the truck.. your ownership claim is gone
(as oppose to littering(just throwing it on the ground)where council will try to find owner and fine them for littering)

as soon as the trash truck arrives at someone someone elses land and puts it on the land.. its not your x2. it becomes the land owners property/problem
you have no claim on your trash no matter what it is. once in land fill

yep they even have laws about trash/litter, so the council cant lose, but the guy already has


the addresses are known and funds have not moved in a decade. so the workers at the landfill obviously didnt remember the area of the landfill the truck unloaded that day as yes the workers probably would have had a rummage in that area hoping to get jackpot to share between themselves

so you admit china had the money 2020-2023 to buy gold.. ok thanks for debunking yourself on another side topic.
they bought in 2021-22 (average $1.6k) and now have hoard at $2k average..
looks healthy investment to me
especially if in 2024 they can hand out gold bricks as 'cashback' back-handers to support the real estate market, where a $75k gold brick only cost them $60k.. plus those deals get people buying real estate to then accumulate another $175k from real estate project sales, where they got property for free due to grabbing up evergrande property


funny thing is.. US faked their #1 ranking on their own listings..
i hope(but never expect from you) to research the whole debt defined as GDP math.
and you will see why US is happy to raise the debt ceiling to retain its foundations as #1.. problem is the US debt in REALITY is hurting the US

when people stop watching things in $USD and start watching world economics in lots of domestic prices.. the USD will start to show its points of rust where it pretended to be gold/stainless steal

the US wants to be a net exporter(previous strangle holds via trade commission terms), to draw value into the US via giving away US goods at luxury prices.. but when other countries start to say no.. US domino's start to tumble

i know you are itching to reply 'but us sales of Iphone in asia are up' no they are not, shipments are up. but asia are not buying. instead they are filtering them on to other US sanctioned countries so that its asia that get the sales from destination countries, the US does not sell directly to.
also the iphone shipments are small in comparison to other phones combined, (and actual sales in asia.. )

belongs in economics section but lets dig into it

firstly active duty military people dont need to access their own bank account, they are fed and sheltered by the army base/camp for the tour of duty so would turn up each day.
however they would hope when tour is over their bank account will be full enough to show their work was worth their effort

as for USD as a whole
the US actually pay other countries to build stuff

EG
UK bread £1.50
US bread $2.00

if the UK didnt hyper inflate where bread stayed at £1.50, but US did inflate where bread was $20
thats good for the US military complex

if a tank engine cost $2m(£1.5m) (1m loaves of bread yesterday)
but next year(after hyper inflation scenario) they can buy a tank engine for the same £1.5m
but it only costs equivalent of 100k loaves of US bread, not 1m loaves of american bread
so 90% discount because they order such things years earlier

its much like locking in low interest mortgage on a fixed 10 year whilst on low inflation.. so when it hyper inflates it feels like you are paying less bread for your mortgage

moses(leez) and do some research, CSW is not the inventor..
CSW is a scammer, conman, fraudster and no one should like CSW, even you should dislike him

the actual satoshi disappeared in 2010(here)-2011(completely) and never returned. so there is no emotion about someone that has no bearing on bitcoin today
i respect what the actual bitcoin inventor done for bitcoin. but you keep thinking a active scammer today is satoshi.. you have no clue and should research or move on

'bitcoinexchange' were still test trading in march 2010, i think they done first real trade in april
but yes bitcoinexchange existed too in 2010 era

set rational expectations

2012(halving year) did not end on above $30 (previous 2011ATH)
2016(halving year) did not end on above $1.2k (previous 2013ATH)
2020(halving year) only just by days ended on above $20k (previous 2017ATH)

so be rational.
set december 2024 as expectation to not exceed $70k.. but be over $70k in 2025s ATH expected year

so invest based on that rational thought

buy low, sell high

wait till you read about tim draper holding hands with CSW trying to legitimise a CSW scheme but tim pulled out at last minute
wait till you read about tim draper holding hands with a bitcoin foundation owner who was a child star but turns out to have other child fascinations

seems tim always finds people with weak morals ethics

first it was done via mutual agreement via messaging. EG satoshi to hal messaging each other and hal agreeing to accept 10btc from satoshi

then the bitcoin pizza deal

then people also advertised selling goods, like alpaca socks, bitcoin cupcakes

"bitcoin market" was first fiat-btc exchange
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=20.msg726#msg726

new liberty standard was another
bitmarket.eu
bitomat
then mtgox
then bitcoinica
then btc-e
then others followed

im sure im missing a few mentions, but google can give you more answers faster then me finding old notes

---

for less CEX'y sites
there was things like localbitcoins, (a hybrid between cex and dex in the style of like a live graiglist between buyer and sellers)

satoshi was one person
however satoshi as evidenced if you research. did belong to the libertarian cypherpunks and used their mailing list and gathered idea's from others and patch worked those idea's of old together in a unique way and he cemented them together using his own methods to create bitcoin...
he even cites references to inspirations he had in his white paper
as soon as he released his first version code he was working remotely with the help of other devs like hal finney, sirius, gavin and others until he disappeared

its no secret

..
as for the nonsense of NSA backdoors
bitcoin is open source.. go look for a NSA back door that existed from the satoshi days


well now bitcoin is in core control the front door now is moderated and core opened a 'wide backward compatible' door for their own soft updates.. but thats for another discussion

yes this topic is about BITCOIN so dont use it to promote the shoddy sandbox test subnetwork you want people to migrate over to, to leave bitcoin with less users,, or else i will have to point out where you are going wrong with your recitement of the shoddy network promotion text you are repeating but unaware of the details of effects it has and can cause to the bitcoin network via pretending it too is bitcoin

..
as for bitcoin centralisation/decentralisation
(the network)
yes bitcoin has central points of failure and we should not be utopian dreaming that bitcoin is perfectly decentralised as that lulls people into sleeping and dreaming of silly words recite to them like an advert.. rather then scrutinising the risks

we should be looking for fixes and proposals that diminish the power core have over the protocol we dont need them acting as politicians
instead bring it back to the full consensus system of needing majority network readiness before new features activate so that a majority of the network can be ready to fully validate and archive FULLY and secure the network and data,(its called data/network security, and a good thing) unlike the current soft process that has junk thats not even seen as bad but is not helping the network, and allows dev politics to get involved, meaning we then need to trust, appease, bless and kiss the ring of devs.. (which was not the point of bitcoins invention)

and no ordinals junk does not look like a normal tx.. there are obvious signs its different and code can be made to recognise that.
(hardening up the soft opcodes(now hundreds) that allow data to pass unchecked). require network readiness if someone wants to use an opcode with new format conditions.. (network security) and checking every byte meets a rule(data security)

as for bitcoin centralisation/decentralisation
(the btc coin)
is what gensler is refering to.. which if you count up the UTXO's of the NON dust junk crap.
and the count up the users registered to CEX. from a userbase.. users proclaiming to be bitcoiners are higher % just CEX users

as for the coin totals
the amount of coin moved in the last 3 years. most of the coins within active age, belong to CEX custodians

baseline miners(asics) dont compete for adding blocks

baseline miners compete with other baseline miners to find a special hash that meets the rules of difficulty a block needs to achieve
the baseline miners earn 'shares' for each attempt of a hash which if one of the miners has the winning hash. the mining pool uses that hash to then broadcast a solved block and the baseline miners share the reward based on the shares.

EG the reward of 6.25
if pool had 5 asics working
30000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.3btc
21000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.21btc
10000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.1btc
1000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.01btc
5000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.05btc
(total 62.5trill for easy math)
the baseline miners are competing for hashrate/shares of a block reward
the mining pool is the one competing with other pools to be the first to broadcast a block

if there were too many baseline miners asics on a pool then all baseline miners shares are worth less because they have to share more of the reward
EG
if pool had 10 asic workers
30000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.15btc
30000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.15btc
21000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.105btc
21000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.105btc
10000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.05btc
10000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.05btc
1000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.005btc
1000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.005btc
5000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.025btc
5000000000000 shares(attempts)  gets 0.025btc
(total 125trill for easy math)

as you can see the one at the top that was still doing 30trill attempts but gets half as much by mining in a pool with 2x total asics
however by having 2x hashpower from asics, that mining pool might get 2x lucky by miners able to find a hash sooner, thus mining a hash for next block faster thus maybe solving 2x blocks in same time speed as if there was half as many miners

there is a economic competition balance that needs to play out of finding the right balance of the luck of finding a winning hash vs how many miners are in competition within the pool

there is a economic competition balance that needs to play out of different mining pools broadcasting solved blocks first vs not finding too many too quickly as it affects the difficulty requirement every 2 weeks,slowing them down next fortnight if they run too quick this fortnight

the fee GBTC charge is not to end user share holders. its to AP(agents/brokers)
AP's then charge share dealing fee's and portfolio charges to end user share holders

for instance
im not in US but using the bank broker dealer i used to use for stocks and shares for demo
Grayscale
2%
AJ Bell £22 a quarter
bank £9.50 per trade
i as front-end investors only see/pay £9.50 per trade plus £22 a quarter.. where its AJBell that pays 2%/year to grayscale and recoups that 2%/year within its quarterly charge to investors they have like you or me

i cannot request my shares (in this demo) to be dissolved to then cash out at the back end of grayscale to then move into blackrock
i can only sell my shares to the bank(other investors banks match) at the front end then take my cash to buy shares from another broker that is agent of blackrock

its AJBell(in this demo) that would need to buy back the shares from shareholders like me if they want to re-form a basket to then allow AJBell to ask grayscale to dissolve shares and exit the back end of grayscale and then buy into being an agent of black rock