$55 Million for Blockstream to build out Bitcoin!

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

"We are not that interested in the actual bitcoin as a currency"

-Manish Agarwal, general partner at AXA Strategic Ventures


http://www.coindesk.com/blockstream-investors-see-commercial-use-cases-for-bitcoin-blockchain/

Neither is Blockstream. Problem?

[1714017183]

1714017183

[1714017183]

1714017183

[1714017183]

1714017183

[1714017183]

1714017183

[1714017183]

1714017183

[1714017183]

1714017183

[franky1]

Neither is Blockstream. Problem?

yepp very much so, blockstream is a bait an switch game
first bait an switch
years ago gavin said he was going to retire in 2016. so lets assume blockstream gave him a nice retirement package to take some flack an distract bitcoin users with one corporate debate.
hearne got another payday and handed bitcoinj over to someone else.. he was willing to take one for the team blockstream, to distract users.. both implementations are designed to fail, and people are suppose to concede in defeat that blockstream should be their overloard. but they didnt want to reveal their corporate hand until it was too late.

second bait and switch
when in dominance. they will promise more capacity with segwit. but then bloat up blocks with features, opcodes and payment codes (estimated at 250bytes)
 then they will continue to refuse to increase the blocklimit. and instead switch users over to their premined sidechains. which have a hashrate electricity cost of about $10 for 15million coins. but priced 1for1 against bitcoin..

the plan would be good if it wasnt so obvious

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

First they laugh at you, then they insult you, then they toss wads of sweaty money at you and you lap it up like a poodle. Way to cypherpunk, Blockstream!

Please be advised the Bitcoin community, being mostly libertarian/minarchist/anarchist/agorist in nature, is overwhelmingly pro-enterprise.

Your appeals to anti-capitalist sentiment and class/wealth envy will fall on deaf ears.

Save the Bernie Sanders schtick for the trendy Reddit progs and SJWs.  It has no power here!  

Remember when you and Gmax were going on and on about Cypherdoc’s lack of integrity? That was cute compared to this.

*



*Integrity is what you do when nobody is big blockers are watching.

[iCEBREAKER]

"We are not that interested in the actual bitcoin as a currency"

-Manish Agarwal, general partner at AXA Strategic Ventures

[Sir Lagsalot]

"We are not that interested in the actual bitcoin as a currency"

-Manish Agarwal, general partner at AXA Strategic Ventures


http://www.coindesk.com/blockstream-investors-see-commercial-use-cases-for-bitcoin-blockchain/

So they're more interested in using sidechains than hodling BTC. What's your problem with that?

[iCEBREAKER]

"We are not that interested in the actual bitcoin as a currency"

-Manish Agarwal, general partner at AXA Strategic Ventures

So they're more interested in using sidechains than hodling BTC. What's your problem with that?

I don't have a problem with that.  IMO it's all good, bro.

All I did was reiterate, as a point of law, Honey Badger does not give a shit what "Manish Agarwal" "general partner at AXA Strategic Ventures" (rofl) is or is not "interested in as a currency."

Honey Badger has his own ideas about what is or isn't interesting as a currency.  You (and Manish) would do well to remember that.  Or don't, and put all your money into sidechains.  IDGAF, and neither does Honey Badger.  

[Sir Lagsalot]

iCEBREAKER, sure it's all good. Was asking croTek4 why he quoted that line out of context, seems like he's implying something.

There's a lot of FUD swirling about Blockstream in this thread. I don't see any real conflicts of interest between their business model and Bitcoin's principles. They're under the spotlight when it comes to such things. If there were any real problems, we'd know.

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

iCEBREAKER, sure it's all good. Was asking croTek4 why he quoted that line out of context, seems like he's implying something.

There's a lot of FUD swirling about Blockstream in this thread. I don't see any real conflicts of interest between their business model and Bitcoin's principles. They're under the spotlight when it comes to such things. If there were any real problems, we'd know.

Out of context? Seriously?  Try reading the thread ( protip: start at the title) again and then come back to us.

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

All I did was reiterate, as a point of law, Honey Badger does not give a shit what "Manish Agarwal" "general partner at AXA Strategic Ventures" (rofl) is or is not "interested in as a currency."

Manish has just bought your house. When you track you muddy hooves across his nice clean carpet again, you will know all about it.

As for Honey Badger - AXA just called the exterminators.

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Maybe blockchain is not the panacea the bankers hope it will be:

What cannot happen is bitcoin's blockchain benefiting the intermediation that the digital currency was meant to replace.

Maybe we should just focus on the things we know Bitcoin is good at - peer to peer cash:

Meanwhile, banks don't have a great track record in applying earlier technological advances for their own use. While JPMorgan Chase's CEO Jamie Dimon was touting blockchain technology in Davos last week, his bank's Open Financial Exchange interfaces — a technology from 1997 to provide aggregators a central database of customer information — had been down for two months.

In contrast, the bitcoin network was born from the blockchain design two months after Nakamoto presented the technology. To this day, it has been operating uninterrupted and growing to more than $6 billion worth of bitcoins. The blockchain was the solution to the electronic cash problem. Because it worked, it grew quickly while Nakamoto worked anonymously and only communicated curtly via email for about two years. It did not need investment, venture capital, conferences, or advertisement.

source

[croTek4]

iCEBREAKER, sure it's all good. Was asking croTek4 why he quoted that line out of context, seems like he's implying something.

There's a lot of FUD swirling about Blockstream in this thread. I don't see any real conflicts of interest between their business model and Bitcoin's principles. They're under the spotlight when it comes to such things. If there were any real problems, we'd know.

Its not out of context. AXA Strategic Ventures is a major part of said $55 million that was just invested in blockstream.

invests millions of $$ into company to develop bitcoin. Same investor is not at all interested in bitcoin as a currency. What does that tell you about bitcoin development.

[iCEBREAKER]

iCEBREAKER, sure it's all good. Was asking croTek4 why he quoted that line out of context, seems like he's implying something.

There's a lot of FUD swirling about Blockstream in this thread. I don't see any real conflicts of interest between their business model and Bitcoin's principles. They're under the spotlight when it comes to such things. If there were any real problems, we'd know.

Its not out of context. AXA Strategic Ventures is a major part of said $55 million that was just invested in blockstream.

invests millions of $$ into company to develop bitcoin. Same investor is not at all interested in bitcoin as a currency. What does that tell you about bitcoin development.

It tells us your reading comprehension is atrociously poor.

"Bitcoin development" is not the only thing Blockstream is doing.

Many people are more interested in bitcoin-the-blockchain-technology than Bitcoin-the-first-crypto-currency.  Nothing wrong with that, but you FUD machines try to spin it as something to panic about.

[franky1]

ok icebreaker we get it. your not interested in bitcoin or blockchain. your only interested in defending blockstream.

kind of funny, im guessing they promised you that monero would be one of the sidechains?

that way you can pretend your not getting a payday, but secretly are when monero is pegged 1for1 with bitcoin

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Many people are more interested in bitcoin-the-blockchain-technology than Bitcoin-the-first-crypto-currency.

I'm sorry, but I have no way of interpreting that statement that doesn't involve you being an idiot.

There is no such thing as bitcoin-the-blockchain. The fact that you can even begin to conceive that this may be a thing makes me very certain that you are shit out of arguments in this debate.

Blockchain - anyone can create: can use it to support currency, dns, registries, etc.

Bitcoin - is a digital currency that employs blockchain rules.

Trying to paint bitcoin as some tech-for-hire is a new low - even for you.  

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

ok icebreaker we get it. your not interested in bitcoin or blockchain. your only interested in defending blockstream.

kind of funny, im guessing they promised you that monero would be one of the sidechains?

that way you can pretend your not getting a payday, but secretly are when monero is pegged 1for1 with bitcoin

You couldhave a point there - Ive updated the AXA statement with this in mind:

Blockstream provides companies with the most mature, well tested, and secure blockchain technology in production – the blockchain original protocol extended via various shitcoins like monero – along with one of the most experienced teams in the industry and a neo-nazi troll.

Holy shit, they have hit the motherlode.... 

[franky1]

im just wondering if icebreaker would still be devoted if he found out blockstream were actually blockstR3am

tim swanson and Raja Ramachandran of R3.. at a PwC conference all talking about bitcoin

[iCEBREAKER]

Many people are more interested in bitcoin-the-blockchain-technology than Bitcoin-the-first-crypto-currency.

I'm sorry, but I have no way of interpreting that statement that doesn't involve you being an idiot.

There is no such thing as bitcoin-the-blockchain. The fact that you can even begin to conceive that this may be a thing makes me very certain that you are shit out of arguments in this debate.

Blockchain - anyone can create: can use it to support currency, dns, registries, etc.

Bitcoin - is a digital currency that employs blockchain rules.

Trying to paint bitcoin as some tech-for-hire is a new low - even for you.  

Bitcoin's blockchain exists.  You may download it here.

You don't need to hold Bitcoins to use Bitcoin's blockchain; you only must spend enough to use the blockchain as an immutable ledger (ie, it's tech for hire).

Soon we will have Layer 2 things built on the blockchain's Layer 1, like sidechains and payment channels, which abstract, standardize, and (hopefully) commodify/commercialize/professionalize those processes.

Accounting firms like PwC are very excited to use bitcoin-the-blockchain's technology and infrastructure to do their jobs better, but crypto-currency speculation is beyond their remit.

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Many people are more interested in bitcoin-the-blockchain-technology than Bitcoin-the-first-crypto-currency.

I'm sorry, but I have no way of interpreting that statement that doesn't involve you being an idiot.

There is no such thing as bitcoin-the-blockchain. The fact that you can even begin to conceive that this may be a thing makes me very certain that you are shit out of arguments in this debate.

Blockchain - anyone can create: can use it to support currency, dns, registries, etc.

Bitcoin - is a digital currency that employs blockchain rules.

Trying to paint bitcoin as some tech-for-hire is a new low - even for you.  

Bitcoin's blockchain exists.  You may download it here.

You don't need to hold Bitcoins to use Bitcoin's blockchain; you only must spend enough to use the blockchain as an immutable ledger (ie, it's tech for hire).

Soon we will have Layer 2 things built on the blockchain's Layer 1, like sidechains and payment channels, which abstract, standardize, and (hopefully) commodify/commercialize/professionalize those processes.

Accounting firms like PwC are very excited to use bitcoin-the-blockchain's technology and infrastructure to do their jobs better, but crypto-currency speculation is beyond their remit.

You really are adorable.

You have conned $76m from those poor trusting, hard working VC's and investment types for something they could have downloaded for free via the link you posted? Nice work!

So whats in the blockchain that they are interested in? Isn't it just full of transactions of bitcoins? ( that they are not interested in)

Come on, that was a very weak effort. You will need to invent a better story about your bitcoin-the-blockchain concept....

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

You don't need to hold Bitcoins to use Bitcoin's blockchain;

you only must spend enough to use the blockchain as an immutable ledger (ie, it's tech for hire).

I think this is the most revealing statement you have ever made.

I'm just quoting it now for my own records, but I will come back to it.

For now, I will leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure out just what that statement means, and how it impacts the value of their bitcoins.

[calkob]

it sounds like classic news to me, roll on the big investors....ye ha