Show Posts
I do not understand. Segwit makes blocks larger and more efficient.
No one is forced to use LN (right?). You can do more onchain transactions with Segwit than you can today.
No one is forced to use LN (right?). You can do more onchain transactions with Segwit than you can today.
Core's goal has to be stall onchain scaling as much as possible. Segwit offers only a modest increase in transaction capacity while
actually making transactions more complicated and likely taking more capacity... and years later than most have wanted it.
By artificially restricting on chain capacity, Blockstream hopes to price ordinary users off the main chain and force them to use their
LN solution.
It is better to simply increase the blocksize but Core has done everything possible to stop that.
Yes that's right, the problem is simple, and the solution is even easier, Bitcoin needs only to make bigger blocks with original consensus
algorithm.
The pathetic thing is you come up with this without a shred of evidence. Just prejudice.
Obviously BU has been bought by banks. See how easy it is? Anyone can say anything, but without evidence the claim is garbage.
Obviously BU has been bought by banks. See how easy it is? Anyone can say anything, but without evidence the claim is garbage.
Core is controlled by Blockstream which is funded by AXA, which is tied to Bilderberg.
Even if you don't believe the conspiracy, it should be clear Blockstream seeks to profit from Bitcoin at the expense of the users. This is why they are blocking on chain scaling.
Bitcoin started to show clear signs of corporate banking contamination (bureaucracies) for a simple technical update.
Why people should believe an organization like Blockstream will have the "best" intentions for Bitcoin if Bitcoin as a decentralized product
represents a direct treath to the people behind the curtain of this organization?
Asicboost on the other hand, would hand over BTC to just one Chinese entity on the planet...much worse.
Chinese have over ~68% control of the ASICS, asic boost working or nonworking will not decrease that % at all.
Yes and even if that may happen, nothing stops another entity to build more asics and compete into the market.
What no one has said about Core Team is they are attacking other solutions as being centralized but the ones becoming centralized are
themselves, a straight centralized financial group is behind them for not saying a "company", Blockstream, they are no longer a Fundation.
They attack people wanting to follow original consensus algorithm but they want to implement new consensus that were not even wrote
in Bitcoin whitepaper, they want to radically modify how Bitcoin works, 'no one can modify Bitcoin but us' isn't that position
the most clear sign of centralization?.
Also, why centralize the power in just one region? it is healthy for the network to have "consensus" leaders all around the world, in North America,
Europe, Asia, among other regions. With hashrate anyone in the world can become part of it.
And.. for the record, Satoshi Nakamoto didn't dissapear for no reason, he dissapeared when other Core members started meetings with the
CIA at 2011, some of them decided to make some distance from Bitcoin when they got called from CIA but for Satoshi this was the trigger
to completely dissapear as any other post/message from him could bring new clues to people behind him.
Finally.. Whom current Core members repond to at this stage?
