How original is original when only a handful of (mostly shady) people believe it is so?

Also, patents are a plague to anything that supports freedom and free use, which in the end, makes the world a better place. Enterprises don't need Bitcoin at all, just a database that works and allows for more scalability where decentralization is never at risk because that's not their aim at all.

Roger Ver is a douchebag, but at least he doesn't give a damn about patents and the law. The sole purpose of crypto is to not give a damn. CSW could very well be a government spy.

Any source or links would be nice to append on topics such as this.

Anyway, I wouldn't believe an ounce of what CSW is saying regarding bitcoin's technicalities. The dude clearly lacks competence in code-reviewing, let alone credibility and firmness on what he's saying in front of the masses.

The BSV and BCH drama between CSW and Ver only proved that the dude only aims to make money and not get the interest of the masses on the top of his list.

Whatever this man says, don't believe it. It's a bunch of crap with unbacked claims.

https://news.bitcoin.com/alleged-8b-btc-tulip-trust-expires-with-tales-of-bonded-couriers/


The tulip trust must be expired right now, but some peple still waiting the "tulip trust" will come.
people who still trust sathosi nakamoto is David Kleiman will says BCH will take over bitcoin, what do you think about this issue?

Give them some space for what their network/protocol should be, or shouldn't be. I believe the Bitcoin community should have no problem with it. BUT they should also stop trolling everyone by calling their coin "the real/original Bitcoin".

Das Coordicide Whitepaper hat ja damals einen Mix aus einem DPoS-ähnlichen Mechanismus und einem Web of Trust angekündigt. Also so in Richtung Ripple, Hashgraph, Obyte/Byteball oder auch NEM. Das könnte schon funktionieren, wäre halt das semi-dezentrale "Oligarchen"-Modell. Das Dumme dabei: Dann wäre man nicht mehr selbsternannter Technologieführer, sondern müsste kleinlaut zugeben, dass man bei anderen Altcoins bereits seit langem etablierte Technologien nutzt (im Fall von Obyte sogar schon verbunden mit dem DAG-Ansatz).

Ich würde den Ausfall auch nicht überbewerten, aber er zeigt eben mal wieder schön die Stärken einer wirklich dezentralen Kryptowährung (und die Schwächen von zentralisierten Ansätzen).

Bezüglich Bitcoinkurs: Wie ich die die geposteten Charts interpretiere hat sich eigentlich wenig im Vergleich zum Oktober geändert, nur halt eine Stufe tiefer, es gab sogar ebenfalls ein Low leicht unter dem ersten. Also für mich siehts eher weiter fallend aus. Allenfalls den leicht ansteigenden Mikrotrend der letzten Tage könnte man als ein positives Zeichen interpretieren, aber die Feiertagszeit ist m.E. kaum aussagekräftig, da Volumen zu schwach und hauptsächlich botgesteuert.

Hello guys, has it ever happened that some pool had exceeded 51% of Bitcoin hash-rate? I tried to find some information on the Internet, but there are many articles which are not in the contrast so I am not able to find out which of them are correct and which are just hoaxes. Thank you

Arguments against block size increase are based on decentralization[1] and alternatives such as Segwit, which will reduce transaction size instead of block size (which will be able to achieve the same result without increasing centralization)

[1] as satoshi said


If you don't care about decentralization, as you think it does not justify a reduced block size, you have two alternatives:
Use BCH  or Visa. I think Vista is much better lol

Visa can do 24.000 tps, while BCH is centralized and do only 60.

man hat es geahnt, nun ist es amtlich: IOTA ist kaputt! das ich das noch erleben durfte.  

https://cryptomonday.de/breaking-iota-netzwerk-steht-still-koordinator-legt-tangle-lahm/

why does it bother you so much if people use BTC as a store of value or speculative asset more so than a currency?

history seems to disagree with you anyway. during strong bull markets, BTC price and transaction fees rise in tandem. when demand is high, people don't seem to mind paying high fees for the privilege of owning BTC.

Shake it?

I doubt it. But the expectations are clearly bullish in this regard.

Over the past few halvings markets have always risen, typically around 1-2 years after the halving marks the peak of the bull market.

This seems to coincide with current market developments as well. We'll get a real shot at retesting the 5 digit psychological barrier once again and finally break out of all the bearish sentiment that is currently present within the market.

Da passt jetzt mein Lieblingszitat von Tone Vays dazu:


Hat gerade in Ländern mit streng diktatorischer Führung natürlich noch viel mehr Bedeutung als (aktuell) bei uns in Europa.

i assume you're referring to the privacy features of the lightning network, or maybe the future integration of schnorr signatures?

bitcoin and BSV are both getting regulated to hell regardless of these privacy features, so i'm not sure what point you're trying to make. regulations like the 5th AML directive capture all cryptocurrencies under the same umbrella. BSV exchanges and custodial wallets are screwed just the same as everyone else.

What does it mean to scale the original transparent bitcoin industrial way? How would it make bitcoin avoid the regulations?