yawn.. more idiots avoiding checking blockchain data, code and avoiding looking at who wrote the code and scrutinising them... yawn.. boring social drama..



doomad funnily enough i been talking about your cultish crap for years..
you even cried when i called you lot fangirls and choir and a flock of followers

ive been saying about your adoration of authoritarian control for just as long
heck you cant even read your own post history to stick with your own story and its you that uses my words as your arguments.. and now you want to pretend you invented it..
you have never had an original thought in your life. you sound like a snake oil salesman. a cult leader. someone that wants to break bitcoin for greed


secondly. you dont use logic or math. you just want to avoid negative speak about core devs by insulting anyone that speaks badly of core devs. even though the core devs are the ones that are supposed to be critiqued and scrutinised the most. not blindly followed like some godlike religion

heck you pretend to be against certain things until you are told that core support the bugs and suddenly you want to call them features.
you even use this tactic as part of your recruitment. try to get people who hate something to think you hate it to to win them into liking you. then you tell them to love the thing they hate as if its the only option they have.

and you go hell bent on treating their bugs/flaws/faults, as things people should use. whilst then telling people to stop using bitcoin for normal currency uses of normal real life purchases.. to instead only do normal real life purchase stuff using other networks or systems your sponsored to promote

the only thing you ever try to say for "franky is wrong" is quote one of your previous posts or one of the posts of your clan who are also saying i wrong" yet there is no actual logic in what they are saying apart from the "franky is wrong"

take for instance nutildah trying to pretend that he debunked me. nutuldah has not even done the math on the example he gave of how he thinks ordinals transfers.. heck he cant even see using blockdata that if you follow the theory the results dont go to where he thinks they go to. instead he wants to trust a broken theory of a display more so than actual block data and sat movements. and that even before the crap about how the crap like means. dont even sit inside tx data, but are appended outside at the end and not assigned to any output

but hey when you shout "franky is wrong and hurting my head" to a moderator and get your cult to do the same to cause the moderator to ban me from a category due to your cries.. and then you use that to say franky must be wrong becasue we cried to a mod. the you use that you then say franky must be wrong becasue we showed our buddies that he was wrong becasue we cried to a mod

all your showing is just echos of "franky is wrong becasue we said so" without actual proof

you have never actually debunked me once about anything.
you are jsut using echos of social drama thinking if you can keep saying "franky is wrong" then it becomes true

i however dont want or need ass kissery or a clan or cult. i dont even want to spoon feed people. they should just grow some balls and brains and do some research for themselves for once and actually read the code and block data for themselves and look at who caused the shit thats affecting the masses

all you care about is recruiting people its all you can think about. its why you think thats what i must be doing too because its the only tactic you know so you think its the only thing thats happeneing.

i dont care who likes me im not looking for friends or a social club. i want to discuss bitcoin and the devs that are causing problems for bitcoin..
shame that you want to avoid such topics or dismantle such topics by making it all about franky.. the funniest part. is you say i dont write code. so how can i be the authoritarian that has controlled bitcoin..
your games of shift the blame away from core and onto me is hilarious.. illogical. lacks common sense, and not part of reality. but it is hilarious to see you try to make people avoid discussing the things CORE HAS DONE IN REALITY but then want your cult to "talk about franky" as if "franky is controlling bitcoin"

you are the delusional one that does not have a sense of logic and reality

when half a dozen idiots avoid talking about bitcoin issues and the devs that caused it.. and instead just wat to advertise scams and valueless junk and then try to make anything bad be frankys fault.. well everyone else outside that idiot group can see the idiots

but the idiots will only want to see their fellow half a dozen echoing idiot buddies. while ignoring the thousands of people that are discussing bitcoin issues.. but hey if they think its only franky speaking of bitcoin issues.. thats the idiots problems and so they earn being called idiots

so if you dont want to look like an idiot and avoid being called one.. take a chance on yourself and do some indepenant research for once

ethereum is not the path to mass adoption

the simple reason is this
if you look at the ethereum market price chart. and look at the shape of the wiggle.. ethereum emulates bitcoins movements and a 1:14 ratio
this is because although there is media hype about ethereum token features there is not actual UTILITY of them. its just a bunch of scammers selling valueless tokens and leaving people holding a bag of useless tokens at the end of the day.

if ethereum had its own wide community it would then also have its own 'price discovery', volatility and speculation meaning none of the pump or dumps or the spikes and dips would match bitcoins movements

however because ethereum market does emulate bitcoins movements at a 1:14 rate, its clear to see the majority of ethereum trades are actually bitcoin traders doing arbitrage via btc-usd-eth-btc and vice versa to cycle trades.

example of screenshots today

i already replied to your question

your mutterings are about a stupid theory handed to you by the cult headed by doomad that the only two options are core do the decision making or no one does unless they want to make an altcoin

you keep bring up the things like immutible code.as if without core it would be immutible.. which i responded with thats not how consensus works and thats not how consensus manges code. consensus and blockchains work by allowing for diverse brans to all have options to propose upgrades and the brans then unites and all happily imploy the feature that has been scrutinised reviewed and shows benefit to the community..
however recent years diverse brands have been REKt into becoming altcoins or sheep followers of core and any brand not core who try to propose an upgrade gets treated as an opposition that "should just f**k off" even your cult leader says this statement all the time. so dont pretend its not a game being played.

your whole mutterings is to love core being the solo architect of bitcoin code change. while at the same time wanting people to not discuss the mess core causes.
then if people suggest options other then the core road map even you recite the rhetoric of go make a smart contract network dont change blockchains dont mess with cores power house and dont speak bad about core

again you ned to realise what core has done becasue yes CORE DONE IT
bitcoin is not some self aware AI that built its own code. core devs done the changes to bitcoin in the last decade. so yes they do need to be talked about when it comes to this junk thats been allowed to occur

and again incase you missed it. consensus is not suppose to be broken down to let any junk in its suppose to be strict rules where the majority suppose to agree on the formatting . where data is suppose to have purpose
and yes it does make me laugh that in 2017-20 era doomad was reciting the "conservatism" mantra of not allow bloat.. and now he has gone polar opposite with the "censor" mantra of not wanting bloat stopped.
but one common theme on both his plots is to stagnate real bitcoin usage, premiumise the cost of real bitcoin usage. all to promote his other prefered network everyone should use instead.. and it seems you are falling into sounding like his sales-man-in-training, rather than caring about bitcoin

low fees are a benefit to all.. merchants and users

bitcoin itself does not work in percentages. but humans so. no one likes to pay more then a couple % of their goods/services in fees.

so when bitcoin is being re-coded using stupid cludgy crap to push fee's up where by fees average $2-$20.. this stuff then rules out many usage reasons for bitcoin
such as billions of people in 3rd world countries cant even move a few hours of wages because the fee alone is more then those wages. they wont want to use bitcoin for a months wage becasue this more then a few percent of their months wage.

people in first world countries wont want to use bitcoin for normal living stuff like paying a $50 utility bill becasue the fees can be 4%-$40% of the actual bill.

and no the solution should not be to abandon using bitcoin and find another currency that has cheaper fee's.. the solution is actually to sort bitcoin out to be a currency for the unbanked again (currency for even the poor)

asic miners do not touch or select transactions. they just hash a hash. it doesnt matter to them if a block is 1tx of 400bytes full or a 4mb block of 1 monkey image or a 1.7mb of ~3000tx(treated as 4mb of weight). the miners job remains the same.. hash a hash.
asics do not have hard drives so transactions are not an impedance to asics.

as for full nodes. core software is not even compatible with things like windows 98, xp, vista.. so pretending bitcoin should be compatible with hardware pre 2003 is nonsense defence to hold bitcoin to ransom at low tx counts.
we are in 2023 not 2003.. so dont be fooled by the debunked rhetoric of "blocks should not be more then a win95 floppy disk amount"
heck these days billions of people are downloading movies and uploading livestreams of more then 24mb an hour (4mb x 6) so its not like we are in the days of dialup. (unlike what altnet onboarders want you to think, where all they are interested in is getting you to use their preferred other network)


bitcoin should be capable of processing more tx counts per block so that each individual pays less because the total fee going to a mining pool is still a good total fee combined as the reward due to more usage, but with each individual paying less
EG 2000tx paying $20 each or 20,000tx paying $2each.. same total for pool owner but each individual pays 10x less and allows for 10x more users to happily use bitcoin
did you know if you remove the bad math cludge of the 1mbtx data 3mb witness crap to be a proper 4mb space of real ex data with proper signature required formatting rules of a normal 2in 2out. there could be 16,000tx instead of the current ~3000 average being seen as "4mb weight"


blackmailing bitcoin to have less transactions per block via many exploits, byte miscounting, and segregating parts of data where tx cant use the full 4mb properly.. and many other issues experienced in recent years is causing less people to want to transact. this needs to be fixed

and no its not just the FUD about "bigger blocks" its actually to get rid of the byte miscounting cludge and the premium creating stuff that pushes fees up. its about actually counting every byte and ensuring each byte has ethical, efficient and economical reasons for being in a tx. where each opcode has proper formatting rules of expected data that should be used for such opcode. to avoid random junk just being included to fill the space.

also where by fee's are not made to make everyone pay a premium. but instead whereby spammers re-spending very low confirm counts pay more if they want to spam .. thus not everyone pays the premium. just those that want to constantly take up space too often than normal real life usage would show.

in the real world normal people do not use a ATM/debit/credit card every 10 minutes every hour every day. most people only use currency once or twice a day on average. and so if those that want to use it every 10minutes 24/7 should be the culprits paying the premium. not the ones that get the discount whilst causing everyone else to pay the premium

bitcoin is code and code can and did make rules. its just a shame that over the years certain key members of core devs(5 of them now) are too much in power controlling and removing the rules to cause bitcoin to become less useful for the masses. all because they are sponsored to promote that the masses should abandon bitcoin to use other networks they prefer. and we needs to do something to fix this game they are playing

you want to know if people want monkeys or not

check this topic
its not "just franky" thats against the dead weight crap

but it seems you have entered the half a dozen idiot echo chamber group that dont want it fixed

and you are now also reciting their other narrative of thinking without core being the sole arbitors of code decision the only other option is no change. where you then repeat that you think core are needed as sole decision maker for the benefit of everyone else

here is the thing.. your recent change of mindset where you are suddenly sounding too much like doomad.. is not even an original thought by you. instead its just that same echo. its like a script. same echo's same words same buzzwords and chants.

many can notice the same scripts are being said by the same small minded core adoration brigade of whats sounding like the echo chambers of a cult

however if you dare try to challenge yourself to look outside the mutterings of that script you will see many many topics talking about how annoying these exploits are affecting bitcoin users.

your cult leader you recite near verbatim now, keeps wanting you to think its "just franky"
but look outside his scripts. and actually see the many topics and thousands of people in such topics all asking for BITCOIN scaling.. not other network pushes.
many thousands talking about high fee's and how the memes and json junk is causing fee mania and tx count issue of real bitcoin utility. all the topics about spam and other things.

topics about how core are doing the "great consensus cleanup" and softening consensus

look outside of the cultish scripts. challenge yourself, actually try to make posts again that do not sound like a rehash of the scripts doomad has got his flock to recite . break away from the echo's of the idiots.. think for yourself. actually look at the many different topics about stuff core caused where many are talking less ass kissery about core.  dont get stuck into the ass kissery and ignore anyone that doesnt sound like a confirmation bias cult member echo. becasue if the only comments you want to read are from the echo chamber. that will be all you ever see.
ignorance and blindness are not virtues or features you want to inherit.. because those features are not working for the penny pinching sigcampaign idiots of the clan you are being indocrinated into

i am not asking for you to believe, trust, kiss my ass.. im saying just open your eyes beyond the doomad crap. and actually read the thousands of other posts by other random people that are not the half a dozen buddy group of doomads little social drama cult

look at the code. look at blockchain data. use logic math and common sense. not project managers quotes of broken promises
work things out for yourself. realise cores broken promises and neglect to fix the crap the caused

DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH

i know some people try to play around with the nonce range for a few reasons
a. so multiple devices are not bruting the same ranges of the same given blocktemplate header hash
b. taking the chance that the solution is found not in the first or last 10%'s of ranges so ignoring them and only bruting the middle 80%

but overall these games will not help you compete against the modern asics that are 300% more efficient.
...
the r909 is 1.5th for 100w
meaning for 30x r909 you are getting 45TH for 3kw

this is very inefficient because most asics running on bitcoin (that break even/profit) are of 3kw for 150TH+
so you are 3x+ inefficient per 100w.. yep 300% less efficient than modern asics

if you are trying to overclock:
over clocking it wont make you 3x more efficient to rival/compete.
overclocking it would simply overheat the device and kill it sooner meaning you want earn much long term.

in short its time to retire the device and get something more efficient

..
the r909 is using old chips of 2019. (way out of date tech(the s17 range))

its not about "immutible"

you are reading echos of idiots that are saying that if core cant change it no one should by which if core cant change it then the code should never change again(immutible)

thats the echo chamber FUD campaign of suggesting that strengthening consensus to require super majority opt-in to activate upgrades would be treated as never upgrading if core are not controlling the upgrade process.. which is the FUD/lies

pretending bitcoin becomes unupgradable without core being the authority is not the facts or the point

its not even what consensus is about. consensus is not about having one ruler who makes decisions and people are to choose to follow the single ruler or make an altcoin(their other fud echos)

the point is that before bitcoin even existed there were cypherpunks trying to create digital money that was different to the authoritarianism of fiat. whereby they were looking to have a system with no central point could control the rules of a currency and no individual could break those rules. but where a majority could align to some good rule policy which does change when there is majority acceptance. in a way that there is no single brand being the major. but unity found in decentralised diversity of brands and software.

bitcoins very invention solved this. consensus and blockchains is not a by-product. its the main feature.
the reason why they seen the elegance of consensus and blockchains solving the decentralisation problem is very much the reason bitcoin got popular in the first place.

you have fallen into the echo chamber trap of thinking that the only two options are: expensive bloated junk crap data with soft/lack of rules. or a ruleset that never changes ever. that is also stuck with the current cludge, where the only option for cludge hater is to make an altcoin..

you have been told bad advice about the way things work and the options available. as the advice you have been told is all about, essentially "accept unscrutinised centralisation or f**k off"

think outside of that echo chamber. actually learn the history of bitcoin and where the problems lay and what actually occured along the way

consensus is about a super majority of the masses voting in a change.
however that has been broken down recently where changes are made to the main protocol rules where it does not require supermajority readiness before new features activate anymore

then came the lack of checks on byte arrangement, byte counting, format requirement data expectations of tx data.

and when you look at who caused it. you notice the same names..

the solution is not to ignore who done it or try to echo chamber "franky wants to break bitcoin, miners want to break bitcoin" actually look at who wrote the changes that made bitcoin annoying to use for the masses.

we as a community are suppose to scrutinise and criticise those that are responsible for code changes of the bitcoin protocol. we are suppose to hold them accountable and responsible when they make errors and yes we are suppose to get them to fix their bugs.  

at this current moment trying to offer a differing brand will get rekt becasue the echo chamber is so loud that people are too dumb to see the echo chamber loves the controls and hates to see their idols be responsible or become required to be open to decentralisation. they love the central power house too much

people need to be more open to decentralisation and actually open to peer review and challenging the core devs. then the core devs would and should be more open to proposals not made by just themselves or just their sponsors

the echo chamber of asskissing authoritarianism is what should be dealt with. instead of idiots becoming the echos and trying to call anything not part of the authority. the authoritarians(shifting the blame)

but i guess you seem to have already dug your hole and now you are stuck in it, where the only thing you want to hear is your own echos of the same voices telling you to sit in the hole

goodluck

---

as for nutildah.
 i see you cant be bothered to do the math. for yourself. seems math does not make sense to you.
and i know your game is cry that you cant do math so someone spoonfeeds you the math. and if you dont like who is spoonfeeding you the math you simply shout their math is wrong. which is why i keep saying do your own research so you cant play that ignorant game

so here it is.. and yes i can tell your reply is just going to be to ignore the math.. but hell seems you are crying that you cant do it yourself. so here goes

the value shift of the 128tAax78tCkzGfHoQETPFiLRJV2RkB2og 0.01024404 where the first sat sits is here:


12YJUgKwcEmvCuNZexVV1ZTVMciJ1J4S1u         0.00671313 \
16JqNeHqhpBg1SyvSqXR3ShvNY1rJtaTkN          0.00007000 -- 0.16738313
1H5E2CeoXn7nk1sB9kWPzecp1goK8aeVSm        0.16060000 /   
128tAax78tCkzGfHoQETPFiLRJV2RkB2og   0.01024404
               
this means that the 0.16738314th sat is the first sat of 0.01024404 (128tAax78tCkzGfHoQETPFiLRJV2RkB2og)

so follow how much is being spent. in order(counting sats) to see where that sat ends up
         
so count the sats

here ill show you
the inputs being spent total 5.01000002btc (5.0079479 if ignoring the fee)
where by the "first byte" of the block reward is the 0.16738314th sat (if you ignore fee spent first)
so you look at the outputs and notice the first 5btc go to.. wait for the logic to set in. wait for the maths to settle into your head.. yep the "first sat"(of the blockreward)  inside the spend of the tx in question goes to... 1GQdrgqAbkeEPUef1UpiTc4X1mUHMcyuGW
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/3d8bf3ff4137ba65da395e9d545eb53c230b58411f4289a3c2a037f2c64fa20b

which then because the "first sat of blockreward" is stil part of the first 99% of the 5btc not the last 1% .. then still goes to the 1GQdrgqAbkeEPUef1UpiTc4X1mUHMcyuGW in
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/070812ee9cb49356b352eb760316872198a44b8f38e42ac66afef72ef946b4dd?i=0

check it out for yourself..
do the math
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/070812ee9cb49356b352eb760316872198a44b8f38e42ac66afef72ef946b4dd?i=0

you trust the ordinals explorer more then actual block data

dont blind trust the ordinals explorer..  instead:
follow the MATH, LOGIC, ECONOMICS, COMMON SENSE not the project managers of a broke explorer

he may say that gorillas belong in the mist and then display a webpage of mist.. it doesnt mean that gorillas live in the webpage. real gorillas are found elsewhere in the world.

learn common sense
check the block data not a explorers interpretation. then when you see the real block data and the math. you then see how broke ordinal is

---

i cannot beleive that after soo many weeks now you are still finding excuses to not look at the hard data of block data. and instead insisting on blind trusting the ordinals explorer. (facepalm)

why are you wasting weeks of your own time avoiding looking at the math and actual hard data and applying logic and economics to the hard data.. why are you obsessed with blind trust of a project managers empty promises

you seem too financially motivated to want to assume that ordinals work

..
and as for your other assumptions about the "change" being secondary/final.. you might want to check your own example. of that 1GQ address path of funds that move portions of the 5btc. yep its not always sending the change as the final output.

do the math.

core is not using the byzantines generals solution because the byzantine generals solution is about diverse and independent brands of full nodes(generals) that can all propose upgrades where the supermajority agree on a path to follow.. .. core however want to be a single major general making everyone obey core and have no one question cores orders.

as for thinking that someones getting REKT because their idea is flawed. that has not been the historic past of examples. they got rekt simply for not being core. and treated as the enemy for asking for something not in the core roadmap

doomads social contract is his belief they everyone should obey core, but never criticise, scrutinise or ask anything of core. to instead trust that the 5 maintainers will self govern each other and trust that they will do such.

in short he thinks the only general of bitcoin should be the 5 core maintainers. and no other generals should exist outside of core. no one outside of core should be able to make proposals to the core generals, nor ask the core generals for other options that contradict the core general.

he thinks other brands should just be infantrymen following orders and echoing the orders of the only general

that quote of caseys description.. you are using as your rebuttal has nothing to do with the counting sats method you are trying to use as an explainer of your exampled taint path

because that 5btc is not breaking up the coin into 3 amounts where the 'rare' sat goes to the 3M address.
not is it about shifting sats around. to end up with the specific rare sat ending up in the 3M address

JUST DO THE BASIC MATH !!!

why do you waste weeks avoiding the logic, math, and instead just want to blind follow some project manager
have you ever tried to think about verification of blockdata rather than "trust project manager "
just spend the 2 minutes required to do the obvious instead of wasting weeks avoiding the obvious whilst trying to find lame excuses to avoid it just so you can remain a loyal ass kisser to a project manager rather than math/economic, logic proof


your a noob with alot to learn
changes used to be made when supermajority are sticking to the same rules thus the blockdata accepted by the majority unites around those rules

however there is only one full node brand that has become god like, that wants to be the new rule proposer and treats any other node proposer as the enemy.
meaning that one proposer is the central point of failure..(anti-decentralisation)

the whole point of consensus is that it does not need one brand to rule them all.. learn the whole point of consensus solving the byzantine generals problem

there should not be one major general in charge making all of the proposed orders. there should be many generals able to coexist all proposing possible ways forward where the best path follows. and then a different general can come up with something new next time. .. with no reliance on one general giving the marching orders everytime.

LEARN DECENTRALISATION
LEARN CONSENSUS
LEARN BYZANTINE GENERALS TOLERANCE
LEARN CENTRAL POINT OF FAILURES

the reason this ordinals crap has not been fixed is because people cant propose a fix .. becasue core BAN people proposing such. yep there is no BIP on their github to fix it. heck even Luke JR who used to moderate the BIPS cant even get his discourage ordinals into a BIP. thats how controlling core are. and even when people add a discourage ordinals patch and try to release it to the masses.. core and their fan club REKT it by saying dont trust it. its not signed or reviewed by the 5 maintainers of core.

..
also i see you have fallen into the trap of thinking stupid things like ordinals are real assets. you were even willing to accept an ordinal just yesterday in another topic..
you have much to learn. but goodluck ass kissing the idiots that want to scam you and control you.
maybe just for once break out of becoming another echo of their plan. and do some independant research. think more about bitcoin as a system that should be decentralised that uses the mechanisms that made bitcoin work in the first place .. the invention of consensus.. to realise bitcoin does not and should not be controlled by a central point
and then learn that not every project manager exists to help the community. they are there becasue they have been sponsored to harm the community, whilst promoting their other favoured networks they want people to move to

dont just read a project managers concepts, theoriies, promises. read the code and how it affect the blockdata. becasue its the code and the blockdata that is more important then their broken promises.
and certainly dont still ass kiss them when their broken promises are shown to the world
EG
promise: taproot makes witness usage lean..
actual result: a tx can use upto 4mb of witness for dead weight junk unrelated to proof of signing a utxo

shorting is selling at a price and buying back in when/if it corrects down(dips).. however this is not guaranteed. and if the price goes the opposite way. you lose your stash

for instance even at the peak of $70k it never shorted to $7k to be a 10x oportunity. the most you would have got if timed perfectly on a 18month contract is 5x by shorting.. 

what you are being told about is not pure shorting. but leveraged shorting  this is where you gamble. by getting a loan of 10x or 100x of someone else value compared to the value you own.. and hope to trade it to then get back in enough to pay out their original amount leaving you with many multiples..
but again it only wins if the price dips to the amounts that can afford you the profits you seek in a contracted period you set the leveraged loan for..

but here is the thing. the way the fundamentals play out. the new potential bottom is no longer $15k. its actually higher. it will be $20k+ when/if bitcoin corrects to the new bottom.

meaning at todays $28k .. meaning a max dip of $8k or 30%(0.3x).. so for you to get a 10x(1000%) you would need a leverage loan of 30x risk just to maybe get a 1000% (10x profit) if you were able to get the market price to go your way.

thus the risk does not match the opportunity

the chances of prices dipping all the way down to $20k are less likely thus the 30x loan risk may not pan out.. leaving you with alot you may need to pay back

..
there is a big reason why certain people promote leveraged shorts.. because they are not the gamblers. they are the contract offerers. temporarily giving their value to you which whether you lose or win. they get paid back. yep when you lose.. they win. when you win they win. but when you lose YOU LOSE ALOT and they win alot

done by core-dev-maintainers moderated platforms

go-coin does not have its own open BIPS platform to offer the wide community opportunity to discuss protocol level changes. nor does armory or any other software thats been mentioned by the lemmings of core adoration that failed at disproving or proving their illogics
heck their illogics cant even even come to a conclusion because their illogics both say core do control and dont control.. because they cant even make a point. so hope if they say both then they can pretend they are right.

again in the same post you say one thing and debunk yourself a few sentences later

you say there are hundreds of core devs maintaining.. but there are actually only 5 maintainers

you say there are lots of doctors. yet you want to include the pharmacists who just fill prescriptions wrote by actual doctors. you also want to include translators. and comment grammar checkers.. to pretend their are more doctors maintaining

you then say and let me quote you

"for the rest to follow"

thank you for now admitting that its bitcoin core thats maintaining bitcoin and no developer outside is treated as the same level as core devs

you are saying that all the pharmacists, grammar checkers and blind sheep that dont review the code but just CONCEPT ack(read comments and blind agree) trust the core doctors(only 5) maintaining bitcoin protocols because you believe that the core doctors have no evidence that they deceived the community and so everyone should just go with whatever core devs say.. blindly. by just conceptACK where any scrutiny or critique against core devs should be banned, ignored or treated as hostile.. rather than treated as keeping core devs accountable and responsible

ok heres some evidence of deceptions
a. the promise that taproot was made to allow for all taproot uses to produce a single signature length.. to be more leaner witness weight than other scripts/multisigs/other features that waste more space ..
and yet.. ordinals dead weight memes and other junk has proven otherwise due to taproots activation yep before taproot 1tx taking up 4mb of witness weight was a no no.. but with taproot thousands of transactions using taproot have proven the "single signature length" as a lie.. broken promise.. deception

b. that they were trying to SCALE BITCOIN. yet over the years guess what. all they have been doing is altering bitcoin to annoy people via fee wars and spam methods to make people stop using bitcoin as much where their solution is to use a different network

c. their initial "conservative" dont allow more data per block. due to scary stories about bitcoin is unfit for hard drives manufactured in 2005.. to now being "censorship resistance" of allowing bloat .. both deceptions aimed at annoying the community via broken promises and lies just to get people to move to other networks as the ultimate solution in their eyes
and with that yep even with their now "censorship resistance" they are coding more fee mania mechanisms to make transactions paying low fees get censored.

d. how they abused natural consensus which only reached 45% in their favour. to then use authoritarian practices to blackmail pools into blind following cores demands or face block rejections.. and then try to blame those actions on non core brands

e. core wrote the code. not mining pools and not asic machines or their owners. yet many times core devs and their fangirls have tried to blame "miners" for many things

theres alot more evidence. and yes it can be backed up by code and blockdata. unlike your scripts which are only backed up by comments of your idols that just tell you "wrong becasue franky" which is not even a defence its just a point finger in different direction

i do find it funny how ignorant you are about who wrote the code that let all this cludgy crap in. and then pretend they done nothing wrong and its not their responsibility to fix it.

can i just offer you some advice.
if after a few years now you are still penny pinching for scraps doing sig campaigns for income.. but still hoping your loyalty and obedience to some humans you want to describe as doctors/masters/gods/angels, hoping it will pay off sometime.. if they have not hired you already. they probably never will
and secondly.
when you show blind obedience to a dev instead of caring about the code and protocol and who should or shouldnt control it. try to care more about the code and less about the who.
EG care more about decentralised network with no central point of failure

after all when devs retire.. they will too get REKT and treated as outsiders once they leave the team. so whos ass will you then be kissing.

and one last thing. when you try to pretend there is no central point of failure but then wave the loyalty flag saying everyone should trust the central point.. you counter your own arguments. especially when you also then pretend there are hundreds of maintainers. yet you then highlight the hierarchy thus showing you do actually know it centers around the actual maintainers.

so stop playing games against yourself by arguing and count arguing and contradicting yourself

i know you dont want to admit that core devs caused the exploit that caused ordinal meme bloat crap and fee mania.. but they did open the exploit up.. and code and blockdata can prove it

if you cant trust the blockdata. then you have no clue of the basic principals of bitcoin..
oh wait you dont like blockdata.. as you have admitted in other posts

you blindly trust the ordinals explorer for their THEORY
you do know a THEORY is an unproven idea... do you know why he called it a theory.. yep becasue it can be proven.

many have already debunked the theory. shown how it miscounts and shown even with your example recently how you miscounted it.
let alone all the other problems it has of not even having a cryptographic proof of transfer (data sits outside the signed message of tx data and nothing within the tx data that gets signed, assigns the data to anything)

so when you shown the example, you did not do your own research using separate independent block data from other sources, you just followed ordinals explorer display and treated it as a god
you believe in caseys words more then blockchain economics


now ill say this one more time.
take off the "adore a project manager hat" and instead look at the example you gave but actually check the math of sats and then check things using logic. economics.

without relying on his explorer .. actual use the real block data. and math..

again its you that wants to pretend you have power by sucking up to project managers .. you even thik this is about power..

try to read this and make it clear to yourself

i dont want people kissing my ass i want people to for once think for themselves instead of being a dumb sheep ass kisser

dont just recite comments you read from some campaign/project manager. actually use the blockchain and real data for once in your life.

..
its not difficult to check independently. but i do find it very strange that you spent weeks declining such an easy check. doing all you can to excuse even trying to learn and instead trying to just sound like you want to remain a loyal ass kisser even if the ass kisser you can taste is a scammer

---

ok lets show your failed example again


https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/070812ee9cb49356b352eb760316872198a44b8f38e42ac66afef72ef946b4dd?i=0

check it again. the funds of
- 128tAax78tCkzGfHoQETPFiLRJV2RkB2og went to
- 1GQdrgqAbkeEPUef1UpiTc4X1mUHMcyuGW but then stayed with
1GQdrgqAbkeEPUef1UpiTc4X1mUHMcyuGW

use logic and math.. not caseys own broke explorer
use maths logic and economics. of what the theory says then apply it outside of his explorer.

1GQdrgqAbkeEPUef1UpiTc4X1mUHMcyuGW 5 BTC -> 1GQdrgqAbkeEPUef1UpiTc4X1mUHMcyuGW 4.99523700 BTC
                                                                              3M4B3JtH3dhWV3Ytoh6XzDrxeaSWtvaBnJ 0.00471600 BTC

maths shows the parents block reward is still part of the 4.99523700 if you "follow the theory" and at this point even account for the fee subtraction

then once you realise the explorer of caseys is broke then apply more math and logic.
where by you need to notice that tx fees are taken first and the remainders are given to outputs.. (as change)
then do the maths and se how many hops of the value move from

- 1GQdrgqAbkeEPUef1UpiTc4X1mUHMcyuGW to 1GQdrgqAbkeEPUef1UpiTc4X1mUHMcyuGW
before that coin is spent as a tx fee back to a pool

and once you realise that.
then realise that in all the taint ancestry. the block data shows no markers, tags, references, hashes that show a movement of some thing called "ordinal"

rely on?
stable coins are not fixed to be stable. they can be fractionally reserved and fake marketed to match a price but not have the underlying bank balance to back it when its time to bank run the value out..
have you seen the problems of stable coins in the past. how many have disappeared or de-pegged.. maybe try to read a few more stable coin history stories of many more stable coins that have broke.

totally agree. bitcoin was created to get away and offer something different than fiat currency


well seems you do realise that stable coins do have a problem after all.. so maybe not "trust" them as much as your reply started with

stable coins only real purpose was a fast under 30second confirm time to allow quick arbitrage option of moving value from one exchange to another.
stable coins on a 10min confirm blockchain loses that option.
and no.. before you postulate..  "storing" value beyond that is not a feature. because of the whole fractional reserve de-pegging risks of holding stable coin for any length of time

(using your analogies)
those other brands are not separate opinions of different medical options.. they are not offering that they can fix things core botched. they just follow "the doctors orders" that is a doctor called core. yes it might look like a different doctor but its just following the orders of core. those brands are not treated as even doctors, but pharmacists. just filling prescribed offerings made and signed for by the only doctor in town

not offering independent options. they exist just to make it seem like there is choice. even though its not offering anything different at the protocol fixing level

core dont take responsibility for their actions because they have been sponsored to do a "great consensus cleanup" over the last few years to soften things. but act like they cant, wont, shouldnt fix their exploits THEY CREATED.

even you have been echoing the sentiment that its not cores fault and pretending anyone can fix it. but then you scream and cry that no one should because anyone offering such is a mistrusted inexperienced red flag that should be ignored.

ok here is a couple question for you
sticking with your doctor analogy
do you think that core(the only doctor in town) did botch an operation.. and do you think the only solution should be to move to a different town if said doctor wont repair their botched operation

or do you think the town should have different hospitals and doctors all serving the towns people where by best practices are all met with consensus where any doctor of any hospital in town can propose a new technique to operate and if its shown to work then its offered to the public.

take your core centralist authoritarian admiration hat off when thinking of the answer

and again.. emphasising this for the blind or ignorant that cant even read their own posts to realise what they are saying is hypocritical to their own cause and idolations

thousands of people have released their own clones and no one adopts them because "they are not core, they are not reviewed by core maintainers, its not signed by core maintainers" thus people treat it with mistrust and just REKT them
bitcoin history has proven this, where the many civil wars has resulted in anything not core being told to create their own altcoin if it wants to offer options that differ cores roadmap for the protocol. they are only happy with other brands if the other brands sheep follow cores path, cores decisions.

thus core are a central point of failure. so stop pretending devs are not forced.. because they are they are forced to obide by cores moderation or get rejected as opposition.. heck even your emotions are admitting to it even when you pretend there is no control but show there is control in the same breath

you pretend that bitcoin is open to anyone to try. yet your emotions shout "dont trust" "RED FLAG" before any non core devs have even tried.

also your use of the doctor/electrician/plumber analogies do not apply. because with doctors there are different brand hospitals and people can get second opinions. yet you idolise that hospitals should all follow the policy of one medical institutions and think of anyone not part of that institution be considered quacks(amateur experienced doctors)
heck your doing it now. before any other brand node is released "by franky" you already trying to incite people to not trust it. thus REKTing it when there isnt even a chance for people to view it.. thats how much you are sucking up and idolising the authoritarianism of core maintainers

the issue is.. and take some time to put your core admiration hat to the side and really think
when core are the only doctors in town. the only people that do surgery. and they botch the healthcare they are responsible for. but dont take no responsibility to fix it. and their fans shout "dont tell the doctor to fix it. if you dont like it "fork off to another town"
you are not thinking that the doctors need to be de-licenced/stricken off. you instead want to defend the doctor to allow them to keep cutting into people and make them less able to function in daily life in the town. just to keep promoting that the only option is to move to a different state .. you dont want better doctors that take responsibility for their actions. nor do you want anyone scrutinising your doctor. you love that they are botching operations and causing people to leave town becasue you profit from those in other towns

stable coins are not a great store of value.. FIAT is a bad store of value. inflation has taught people this. wise up
we should not be promoting bitcoin to turn into an asset class to facilitate crappy inflation currencies. especially if those crappy inflation currencies then require regulation auditors and other dumb stuff that failed said fiat world in the first place

and now doomad admits its dangerous.. he needs to see the source of this idea. yep the main core maintainers sponsored by corporate world want to add assets to bitcoin. so its these core devs we need to get to not do this to bitcoin protocol.

yep the main core devs funded by blockstream, chaincode labs and brink(who are promoting that people should use crappy subnetworks like liquid and LN). which are funded by the institutional corporations of the fiat world. already have (broken) mechanisms for multi-asset control on their subnetworks (liquid/LN) but now they want to break bitcoin to make bitcoin more crappy subnetwork compatible. rather then make their subnetworks actually work by themselves
.. where its their subnetworks that should be changing (a)work without flaws/bugs. and (b) changed on the subnetworks for the subnetworks to be bitcoin compatible.

we should not break bitcoin to be crappy network compatible, nor have bitcoin bloated by crappy things that make bitcoin annoying to  use just to promote crappy subnetworks/other assets that people should use instead.