No. I sold a lot of my Bitcoin Segwit, buying Bitcoin Cash with it. I did not 'switch over' in any absolutist sense. I still believe that Bitcoin Cash has the proper roadmap for the future, but I am hedged.

Yep. I simply do not agree that Bitcoin Cash is centralized any more than Bitcoin Segwit in any meaningful way. I realize that there is an oft-repeated narrative that Ver and Wu have made every significant decision in regards to Bitcoin Cash, but this view is utterly ignorant bullshit. And if all y'all would venture outside of this echo chamber of a walled garden, you'd likely realize that latter point as being the truth of the matter

Plus, it bottomed and Bitcoin Core is heading for another fork which might may or may not make Luke-Jr and Gmax shitcoin generals and Lauda its Comical Ali.

Funny story, Gmax is a chain of sportswear shops in Scandinavia.



Edit: They're also a bit outdated. I bought some socks there, brand was Frank Shorter. The music they played in the roof speakers was Culture Club.

Well, I'm a big blocker too and think Blockstream/Core is 100% wrong.  Most of the time Franky posts good things, although, I also can't understand Franky's thinking in this thread.

Core refusing to provide bigger blocks IS the problem.

Well to me you just sound like an apologist for core-created stagnation. 

I'll continue to ring the alarm bells because the fundamentals of Bitcoin house are indeed burning down.

what you dont realise is that i and many others dont need to be paid.

i hold bitcoin from the earlier times.
i am not expressing my opinion to earn an income. i am doing it because i care about my hoard and future. i dont even look at the bitcoin price because even that is just temporary drama to me. i care about the long term viability of the bitcoin network as a diverse decentralised peer network, not a cludgy cesspit with a blockstream dominant tier network

my rationale about antbleed is that their firmware check server doesnt respond, and for months has not been used for anything malicious. and most pools are behind firewalls anyway. if pools were to become malicious all they would be doing is hurting themselves. directly and indirectly

secondly my rationale is that for months nothing has happened but now that segwit supporters are getting very desperate to find excuses to kill off pools to fake a 95% activationof the cludgy tier network, by purely rejecting blocks based on version number.. is a bigger threat because that is more likely to happen than all the if's and maybe's of antpool shooting themselves in their own foot using antbleed

thirdly i will emphasis the last point. shouting out a sudden 'pools are bad because they 'could' shutdown some pools, so segwit/uasf 'must' shut down some pools is hypocrisy in its finest. thats like saying there could be a nuclear war, so america must start a nuclear war.
come on think logically about the mindset of some people "omg X could kill 30% so we must kill 70%" rathre than actually listening to the 70%
its even funny that things have got so desparate that some are saying that 70% are all one man.. (illogical facepalm)

lastly. if segwit supporters want to go down the kill 70% route(which is not 1 person by th way).. this can only be done via a node consensus. then atleast use that opportunity to actually recode segwit as a 1 merkle version where there is just a single block parameter of 4mb that both native and segwit can sit in and include other features the community want and can unite everyone

not simply push out another version that has one small temporary purpose just to allow in something else that only has temporal positive features "at best" but a bigger negative, more long term issues it can and will cause.

now try to reply about my context above without just screaming any thing that amounts to 'typical shill response' or 'wrong because cant find reason but your a shill'  because thats just a whistle in the wind response. P.S dont reply about me presuming your just going to scream something about shilling like your playing the victim card. again whistles in the wind.
reply about the context of the black writing not this grey writing

Lmao. This pretty much invalidates anything jonald the troll says from now on. The blocksize obsessed trolls/paid shills can't see beyond what number the blocksize has.
A guy has a mining monopoly capable of killing the network? Who cares, just raise the blocksize!!
Those trolls should be banned.

bitmain having a switch in its own server, that only affects only its own equipment, which will cause its customers to request refunds.
hmm

oh and also if they wanted it as a weapon they would have pulled the trigger already

however
this last month has all been about blockstream flock trying to find any bug in anything not blockstream advocated.. but not willing to listen when code made by blockstream has flaws

dynamic blocks as Bu propose give a huge power to miners and the opportunity to them to form a cartel and a kind of Opec for fees in bitcoin. Dont expect anyone to agree so easy in this crap. Miners is here to serve the network and not to govern it.
And why you has this psycho with blockstream? this blockstream developers has maintaine the network an always propose tech solutions to bitcoin and for sure not harm it.
Can i ask you what Roger Ver has done for bitcoin network all of this years?
My answer is MTgox and this community split and division.
Can i ask you what Jihan Wu have done for bitcoin network?
My answer is only to form a cartel and break decentralisation.
If we want bitcoin to be the future payment free payment system then this will not happen with nodes that runs through big datacenters and with a mining cartel that can change consensus rules whenever they want.

I am going to keep track of those that I personally feel are
trolling, shilling, fudding, and hurting the discussion of
Bitcoin here.

If you can recommend someone who belongs in the hall
of shame, post their username and a link to a reference.

This is a self moderated thread and I will delete any posts
that are trolling, shilling, fudding, and probably put you on
the list as well if you do that.

i laugh at that statement
along with 'core are the best team'

if everything is perfect and core are the best team.. then there is no need for segwit, there would be no debate
because there are no problems and bitcoin is already in utopia.. right (sarcasm)

oh an the other laugh
core are independent..

after all if independent then when devs do something independently they why would they be subject to REKT campaigns. or fear peer reviewing and helping out independently of other implementations.

the only way they can end up helping is by pretending to attack by publicising the issues of other peer implementations. that way they wont get pigeon holed into other implementations be acting like they are attacking it. when realy they are saying something needs to be fixed at line x,y,z

even gmax is keping his head low by hiring samson mow to be the face of UASF so that gmax doesnt get the face smack talk about Uasf issues and thrown the BIP's moderation over to luke JR and trying to make it look lik achow is the cencorship master of the tech discussion of this forum.. although the puppet strings are visible

classic, xt, bcoin, bitcoinec, bu and other diverse nodes do not want to "take over" (only blockstream(core) want a take over)
blockstream have offered and demanded a few times for anything not core to split away, but that was not taken up because the community does not want a civil war but a real consensus choice of something the whole community can unite around.

hence no deadline, hence to threats, hence no hardware bombs.

blockstream are the ones that bypassed node consensus.
blockstream are the ones that gave only pools the vote.

but blockstream are not getting the pool vote they were hoping for. so now blockstream are looking for blaming everyone. rather than listening to everyone and programming something that the community want..

all of you blockstreamists are forgetting one small thing.

blockstream can code things differently to a way the whole community would be happy.
but no.. its a blockstream short cut or kill every opposer in the community and blame the opposers

You're really trying to sell me the idea that this is totally unrelated...and that the other Blockstream paid devs is unrelated. ok.
 

A HF isn't risky if the community is behind it.  This is the lie that Core told everyone
to stall the scaling...and it worked.