Aren't you the smartest person who ever did live. With superior communications skills, too.
Yawn, another wall of text from a guy who started derailing a LN thread. With superior derailing/offtopic communication skills, too.
You're a huge hypocrite for calling out others for offtopic posts, while you started it yourself. Have some self-reflection.
ps: I've been told (by PM) that I should ignore your posts, because they literally make zero sense. You've been doing this thing for years.
Fuck off with your fantasy spin attempt and pure making up of facts that are not in existence.
Starting the insults now?
Fuck you bitch! Happy now?
See? It's not that hard to post insults!
There are no lies here, I have the forum links in my bookmarks. What do you have to offer to post them?
Mind you, they're are not in English, so you'll have to trust Google Translate.
If that's not enough for you, then stop responding with train(wreck) posts of "thought".
I put my foot in my mouth on a fairly regular basis. Sometimes members "call me out" publicly, and other times they do it by PM.
Thanks for admitting it, fucking dumbass.
Maybe you should refrain from doing that... just sayin'.
Sure there were cryptocurrency concepts like eCash before, but the 'BTC concept', which solved the main issue that all those schemes had, was unknown / undiscovered prior to 2008.
Of course multiple people had these ideas, but nobody could fix the trust vs. double-spending issue.
The very essence of what I'd call the 'BTC Concept' is the application of a blockchain as a decentralized timestamping server; that's the one thing that makes Bitcoin, Bitcoin; it is the thing that made it such a breakthrough and so popular.
I didn't mention eCash, but someone else could consider it an early ancestor of BTC.
Just like Intel 8088 is an early ancestor of Intel i7, even though deep inside they share nothing architecturally.
It seems to me that you're here to argue semantics.
Am I qualified to say that ARPANET was an early ancestor of the modern internet, or are you going to argue that TCP/IP didn't exist back then?
We're not computers, we're human beings. We don't exchange ones and zeroes.
If you understood my point, that's fine. If you didn't, oh well:
Either way, what I said was true.
You thought I meant 2013 instead of 2003, but no, I mentioned the correct order of dates:
First:
Fun fact: someone had informed me about the BTC concept back in 2003 (!!!). What did I do? I mocked him (along with several other forum participants).
Second:
The same person informed us again in late 2008/early 2009 about BTC's launch. Same response. We mocked him to death.
Maybe you didn't read the whole post?
Because there's no way 2013 happened before 2008-2009!!!
I also forgot to mention a few more things about that mysterious guy:
He was obsessed with the cryptography/anonymity/cypherpunk culture (just like Satoshi). Not saying he's Satoshi, just saying he shared the same beliefs.
Plenty of people wanted to meet him in real life, but he refused to do so. Didn't even reveal his real name (mind you, it was a close-knit community with real-life meetings). 2000s forums were very different compared to today.
He used new forum/alt accounts all the time (just like some people use new BTC addresses to increase anonymity).
He came back in 2013, 2017, 2021 to remind everyone (and rub it in our faces of course!) that he was right all along. Obviously he is a huge BTC supporter and most likely an early adopter too (from day 1).
Can I blame him? Someone who was so ahead of his time (back in 2003)?
I didn't say that he solved the Byzantine Generals problem, that's your conjecture.
TBH, back in 2003 I couldn't wrap my head around this whole electronic cash concept.
You'll have to ask him, but good luck finding him after 20 years have passed.
I reckon he will resurface again in late 2025.
If you're interested, put a reminder and I'll give you the link to talk to him.
But let's not argue semantics.
Even if his idea wasn't as fully-fledged as Satoshi's was, you have to remember that in software development we have beta versions (1996, 2003) and the Release Candidate version (2009).
Some people have premature ideas, but not the finalized form of it.
What matters to me is that some people are way ahead of their time. That guy was ahead of you and me back in 2003, that's for sure and that's the point that you missed.
I mentioned this story, because I don't believe that true equality can be achieved.
How can I be equal to that guy? Visionaries deserve to get a bigger portion of the BTC pie.
Can you be equal to him? Or Satoshi? Or the guy who wrote the NSA paper back in 1996? I bet you can't.
Laggards deserve to get a smaller portion of the BTC pie. Hence why "everyone will buy BTC, at the price they deserve".
There's no equality, there is only
meritocracy. Keep that point in mind, all of you.
Sorry if that doesn't sound socialist enough in this woke day and era.
You guys remind me of religious Christian zealots who are "offended" when someone says something that could be considered "offensive" to their "Saint".
I've known about BTC/Satoshi long before you did (since day 1) and I admit it was my fault for not taking it seriously at first. Calm your titties!
I believe this gives a bad name to the BTC community. I had been saying the same thing about Linux desktop adoption to CLI diehards 20+ years ago.
Stop being so fanatic. I didn't attack anyone. Human conversation needs to be more relaxed and less uptight. Or maybe find a girlfriend. Computer nerds can be really annoying sometimes.
If this had been invented before 2008, then Satoshi wouldn't really have presented anything new with his paper.
It depends on what you consider new.
Satoshi stood on the shoulders of giants. He took various existing technologies (p2p/BitTorrent, PKI/PGP, hashing) and combined them.
I'm not saying this to devalue anyone's work. We don't even know who Satoshi really was. It could have been a team of scientists (mathematicians, cryptographers) behind BTC.
Of course it would be even more impressive if Satoshi was a single person, but we cannot know for sure. And we'll never find out.
This debate reminds me of who invented the "first" "smartphone".
Was it Apple/Steve Jobs? Who took already existing ideas and combined them into a nice, shiny package.
Or was it Microsoft with WinCE PDAs?
Depending on who you ask (Apple vs MS zealots), the answer will vary.
I prefer to not be a fanboy/zealot of anyone. I'm too old for that tribalist shit. Tribalism is a natural human tendency in our DNA, it just gets annoying when you're trying to have a relaxed conversation.
If Satoshi is not fussed, you should not be fussed either. BTC is working and that's all that matters.
I do not know or have read all cryptocurrency papers from pre-2008 (probably not one of them), but I can't imagine that someone had it all figured out earlier but somehow fell completely under the radar.
Well, it seems the NSA 1996 link fell completely under your radar for some reason. It seems awfully similar to BTC, a beta form of it if you will.
But yeah, I know some people are "offended" when someone says that BTC could have originated from NSA, perhaps as a psy-op experiment to test the waters of a cashless society.
The truth is: we don't know who Satoshi was, so it could be anyone with decent IT/mathematics/cryptography knowledge.
I hodl BTC and I'm not offended at all. Maybe because I don't behave like a religious zealot. Maybe...
There is no need to speculate. Are there pre-2008 papers that describe what the Bitcoin whitepaper describes? Yes or no? If no, Bitcoin / 'BTC Concept' had not been invented in 2003, absolutely not.
Again; of course, using signatures for payments is nothing new, and these 'concepts' have 100% been discussed prior to 2008, but those don't qualify as 'BTC concept'. Just want to make this clear.
I also want to make clear that you haven't read the forum link I'm talking about and you don't speak the same language as those guys did, so even if I posted it, it would be worthless to you.
Google Translate just doesn't cut it as native language speakers.
This is super off-topic now; but even if you know more women who complain about misfortunes than men, it doesn't make them less responsible for their actions. If they fuck something up, they're liable for it. Like every other adult person.
Children aren't, because they're underage. Big difference; and it's nothing 'new' or 'woke', the laws have been like that for generations.
Again: you're missing the point.
Did I say anything about laws? No.
Everyone is liable for their actions, I agree, but it's very common these days to complain about "injustice/inequality". Rings any bells?
That's a very female behavior and yes, plenty of men do it too unfortunately.
My point was that you don't need any law to tell you that you need to take personal responsibility for your own mistakes. Therefore all this "injustice/inequality" discussion (which reeks of wokeness) is a waste of energy.
Satoshi tried to make the distribution as fair as possible.
It's not his fault that IT guys learned about BTC first.
Who do you think used the internet back in the early 90s? Cute chicks posting Instagram photos? Oh wait, Instagram didn't exist back then!
Of course it was IT guys.
My point is that it's natural for IT guys to learn first about tech things.
It would be highly unnatural for cute chicks to be early adopters.
So if you ever see anyone crying/complaining that he/she missed the BTC train, just ignore them.
What's even more funny is that even poor guys with a regular PC had a huge upper hand in accumulating thousands of BTC at a pretty low cost (just electricity).
Rich non-IT guys (like from Goldman Sachs for example) may have huge amounts of money in the fiat world, but they lack tech knowledge.
So if they want to accumulate BTC, they'll have to pay 19k USD a pop.
You still think BTC distribution is unfair? Only woke idiots would believe that.
We all agree that BTC is a game changer that cannot be replicated.
There are 8 billion people on this planet and not everyone has the same IQ/intelligence/interests. That's fine.
There are also not enough material resources (metals & oil) to manufacture & drive 8 billion Lambos.
So even with "fair" distribution, it would be impossible for everyone to become rich. Mathematics 101
Money (including BTC) is an abstraction for material resources (which are scarce on this planet).
If you want less material scarcity, just wait for Elon Musk's plans to colonize other planets. But in that case, BTC wouldn't work due to TCP/IP latency limitations (Mars would need a new coin, 20 minutes of latency with Earth is just too much for the blockchain to synchronize).
BTC will be the defacto currency of Planet Earth for the next 100+ years, that's for sure.
Show Posts
