Bitcoin Forum
July 17, 2019, 01:37:46 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 »
  Print  
Author Topic: @RogerVer lets make a deal. At least 60k, my BTU for your BTC.  (Read 64017 times)
manselr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 854
Merit: 1000


Trusted Seller


View Profile
July 29, 2017, 06:24:30 PM
 #601

WTF?

I initially thought Satoshis Bitcoin was about economic, tech and game theory... -> perfect eCash for ALL.

Now I see here its rather about people and soap opera?

Looks like that many 'users' are mostly active in posting nonsense and horsing around, rather not in directing all our power and brains in a better solution, community and most important Bitcoin's REPUTATION to the inner and outer side this entire opera is seen in the end ...?

Back to work! Make Bitcoin great again - not soapy!


 Wink


My work here is to do pure analysis of WHY we have this opera:

Its all about a single line of the protocol

Where many would agree about, it is not a consensus pillar

Rather a user specific setting to allow free optimization and adjustments to market reactions

Such a minor param, that even Satoshi lost not much brain upon, rather sth like, it needs to be lifted when time is near and Moores law helps for the rest.

And due to growth and work scaling issues Satoshi resigned, not to be seen as a person, a king like leader, not to be a single point of failure and he diversified himself to a bunch of new dev persons. Carrying the responsibilities to next levels.

Now we need to do the next level, which is clearly diversifying TEAMs to spread responsibilites.

If core does like Satioshi did and showed it works, they need to step back (from behaving like a king) and lets diversify ideas, work and responsibilities through many, but friendly competing teams.

This is the big future for Satoshi Bitcoin!

Satoshi showed us all and we know, he will never come back as Satoshi, or this diversification mechanics will be obsolete.

Satoshi clearly said he didn't want his software forked and he didn't believe in several implementations of bitcoin:


I don't believe a second, compatible implementation of Bitcoin will ever be a good idea.  So much of the design depends on all nodes getting exactly identical results in lockstep that a second implementation would be a menace to the network.  The MIT license is compatible with all other licenses and commercial uses, so there is no need to rewrite it from a licensing standpoint.

Why are we even still disusing this? It's clear that the game theory behind how bitcoin works does not benefit from "several competing bitcoins".

If your ideas don't make the cut in the main branch it's because they aren't good enough. If you want to compete, then make your own altcoin and if people think it's better than the existing Bitcoin, then people will sell their Bitcoins for your supposed "better-than-current-Bitcoin" altcoin, but don't pretend to cause this hardfork drama every now an then thinking you are doing a favor to anyone, because you are just making the price crash, all for nothing because at the end of the day, people aren't going to trust hardforking amateurs with their money.

Im still waiting for a clear statement of Roger Ver claiming that he will sell all of his BTC for BCC. If he really thinks BCC is better than BTC, he surely will dump them right?

Telegram; @bitcointalkaccseller
1563370666
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563370666

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563370666
Reply with quote  #2

1563370666
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1563370666
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563370666

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563370666
Reply with quote  #2

1563370666
Report to moderator
1563370666
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563370666

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563370666
Reply with quote  #2

1563370666
Report to moderator
hv_
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 543

Clean Code and Scale


View Profile WWW
July 29, 2017, 06:46:48 PM
 #602

WTF?

I initially thought Satoshis Bitcoin was about economic, tech and game theory... -> perfect eCash for ALL.

Now I see here its rather about people and soap opera?

Looks like that many 'users' are mostly active in posting nonsense and horsing around, rather not in directing all our power and brains in a better solution, community and most important Bitcoin's REPUTATION to the inner and outer side this entire opera is seen in the end ...?

Back to work! Make Bitcoin great again - not soapy!


 Wink


My work here is to do pure analysis of WHY we have this opera:

Its all about a single line of the protocol

Where many would agree about, it is not a consensus pillar

Rather a user specific setting to allow free optimization and adjustments to market reactions

Such a minor param, that even Satoshi lost not much brain upon, rather sth like, it needs to be lifted when time is near and Moores law helps for the rest.

And due to growth and work scaling issues Satoshi resigned, not to be seen as a person, a king like leader, not to be a single point of failure and he diversified himself to a bunch of new dev persons. Carrying the responsibilities to next levels.

Now we need to do the next level, which is clearly diversifying TEAMs to spread responsibilites.

If core does like Satioshi did and showed it works, they need to step back (from behaving like a king) and lets diversify ideas, work and responsibilities through many, but friendly competing teams.

This is the big future for Satoshi Bitcoin!

Satoshi showed us all and we know, he will never come back as Satoshi, or this diversification mechanics will be obsolete.

Satoshi clearly said he didn't want his software forked and he didn't believe in several implementations of bitcoin:


I don't believe a second, compatible implementation of Bitcoin will ever be a good idea.  So much of the design depends on all nodes getting exactly identical results in lockstep that a second implementation would be a menace to the network.  The MIT license is compatible with all other licenses and commercial uses, so there is no need to rewrite it from a licensing standpoint.

Why are we even still disusing this? It's clear that the game theory behind how bitcoin works does not benefit from "several competing bitcoins".

If your ideas don't make the cut in the main branch it's because they aren't good enough. If you want to compete, then make your own altcoin and if people think it's better than the existing Bitcoin, then people will sell their Bitcoins for your supposed "better-than-current-Bitcoin" altcoin, but don't pretend to cause this hardfork drama every now an then thinking you are doing a favor to anyone, because you are just making the price crash, all for nothing because at the end of the day, people aren't going to trust hardforking amateurs with their money.

Im still waiting for a clear statement of Roger Ver claiming that he will sell all of his BTC for BCC. If he really thinks BCC is better than BTC, he surely will dump them right?

I said nothing about different Bitcoins. Only about different teams.

Carpe diem  -  understand the White Paper and mine honest.
Memo: 1AHUYNJKPfY7PjVK1hNQFo5LrdGixuiybw  -  https://metanet.icu/
The simple way is the genius way - in Moore's Law and Satoshi's WP we trust.
traincarswreck
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250


View Profile
July 30, 2017, 12:42:57 AM
 #603


I don't like Theymos because of his censorhip, manipulation and lies:  https://medium.com/@johnblocke/a-brief-and-incomplete-history-of-censorship-in-r-bitcoin-c85a290fe43
Can I be unbanned from r/btc please!  Actually there is a list of people who would like to participate but don't agree with the r/btc agenda: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6qauyy/ver_theymos_and_his_censorship_can_go_to_hell/
manselr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 854
Merit: 1000


Trusted Seller


View Profile
July 30, 2017, 02:03:59 PM
 #604

WTF?

I initially thought Satoshis Bitcoin was about economic, tech and game theory... -> perfect eCash for ALL.

Now I see here its rather about people and soap opera?

Looks like that many 'users' are mostly active in posting nonsense and horsing around, rather not in directing all our power and brains in a better solution, community and most important Bitcoin's REPUTATION to the inner and outer side this entire opera is seen in the end ...?

Back to work! Make Bitcoin great again - not soapy!


 Wink


My work here is to do pure analysis of WHY we have this opera:

Its all about a single line of the protocol

Where many would agree about, it is not a consensus pillar

Rather a user specific setting to allow free optimization and adjustments to market reactions

Such a minor param, that even Satoshi lost not much brain upon, rather sth like, it needs to be lifted when time is near and Moores law helps for the rest.

And due to growth and work scaling issues Satoshi resigned, not to be seen as a person, a king like leader, not to be a single point of failure and he diversified himself to a bunch of new dev persons. Carrying the responsibilities to next levels.

Now we need to do the next level, which is clearly diversifying TEAMs to spread responsibilites.

If core does like Satioshi did and showed it works, they need to step back (from behaving like a king) and lets diversify ideas, work and responsibilities through many, but friendly competing teams.

This is the big future for Satoshi Bitcoin!

Satoshi showed us all and we know, he will never come back as Satoshi, or this diversification mechanics will be obsolete.

Satoshi clearly said he didn't want his software forked and he didn't believe in several implementations of bitcoin:


I don't believe a second, compatible implementation of Bitcoin will ever be a good idea.  So much of the design depends on all nodes getting exactly identical results in lockstep that a second implementation would be a menace to the network.  The MIT license is compatible with all other licenses and commercial uses, so there is no need to rewrite it from a licensing standpoint.

Why are we even still disusing this? It's clear that the game theory behind how bitcoin works does not benefit from "several competing bitcoins".

If your ideas don't make the cut in the main branch it's because they aren't good enough. If you want to compete, then make your own altcoin and if people think it's better than the existing Bitcoin, then people will sell their Bitcoins for your supposed "better-than-current-Bitcoin" altcoin, but don't pretend to cause this hardfork drama every now an then thinking you are doing a favor to anyone, because you are just making the price crash, all for nothing because at the end of the day, people aren't going to trust hardforking amateurs with their money.

Im still waiting for a clear statement of Roger Ver claiming that he will sell all of his BTC for BCC. If he really thinks BCC is better than BTC, he surely will dump them right?

I said nothing about different Bitcoins. Only about different teams.

Anyone can create their own different repositories, a lot of people run their own bitcoin full node software, but these guys don't want that, they want to change consensus rules, creating a hardfork and thus creating a price crash, uncertainty, and all the hell that breaks loose during a god damn hardfork.

Mark my words: In november or so, we will have another price crash thanks to btc1/segwit2x hardfork attempt. If they did just shut the fuck up and let segwit run for an entire year then talk about a blocksize increase, but no, their ego says that the fork must happen in 3 months. Well good luck with that.

Telegram; @bitcointalkaccseller
hv_
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 543

Clean Code and Scale


View Profile WWW
July 30, 2017, 02:34:55 PM
 #605

WTF?

I initially thought Satoshis Bitcoin was about economic, tech and game theory... -> perfect eCash for ALL.

Now I see here its rather about people and soap opera?

Looks like that many 'users' are mostly active in posting nonsense and horsing around, rather not in directing all our power and brains in a better solution, community and most important Bitcoin's REPUTATION to the inner and outer side this entire opera is seen in the end ...?

Back to work! Make Bitcoin great again - not soapy!


 Wink


My work here is to do pure analysis of WHY we have this opera:

Its all about a single line of the protocol

Where many would agree about, it is not a consensus pillar

Rather a user specific setting to allow free optimization and adjustments to market reactions

Such a minor param, that even Satoshi lost not much brain upon, rather sth like, it needs to be lifted when time is near and Moores law helps for the rest.

And due to growth and work scaling issues Satoshi resigned, not to be seen as a person, a king like leader, not to be a single point of failure and he diversified himself to a bunch of new dev persons. Carrying the responsibilities to next levels.

Now we need to do the next level, which is clearly diversifying TEAMs to spread responsibilites.

If core does like Satioshi did and showed it works, they need to step back (from behaving like a king) and lets diversify ideas, work and responsibilities through many, but friendly competing teams.

This is the big future for Satoshi Bitcoin!

Satoshi showed us all and we know, he will never come back as Satoshi, or this diversification mechanics will be obsolete.

Satoshi clearly said he didn't want his software forked and he didn't believe in several implementations of bitcoin:


I don't believe a second, compatible implementation of Bitcoin will ever be a good idea.  So much of the design depends on all nodes getting exactly identical results in lockstep that a second implementation would be a menace to the network.  The MIT license is compatible with all other licenses and commercial uses, so there is no need to rewrite it from a licensing standpoint.

Why are we even still disusing this? It's clear that the game theory behind how bitcoin works does not benefit from "several competing bitcoins".

If your ideas don't make the cut in the main branch it's because they aren't good enough. If you want to compete, then make your own altcoin and if people think it's better than the existing Bitcoin, then people will sell their Bitcoins for your supposed "better-than-current-Bitcoin" altcoin, but don't pretend to cause this hardfork drama every now an then thinking you are doing a favor to anyone, because you are just making the price crash, all for nothing because at the end of the day, people aren't going to trust hardforking amateurs with their money.

Im still waiting for a clear statement of Roger Ver claiming that he will sell all of his BTC for BCC. If he really thinks BCC is better than BTC, he surely will dump them right?

I said nothing about different Bitcoins. Only about different teams.

Anyone can create their own different repositories, a lot of people run their own bitcoin full node software, but these guys don't want that, they want to change consensus rules, creating a hardfork and thus creating a price crash, uncertainty, and all the hell that breaks loose during a god damn hardfork.

Mark my words: In november or so, we will have another price crash thanks to btc1/segwit2x hardfork attempt. If they did just shut the fuck up and let segwit run for an entire year then talk about a blocksize increase, but no, their ego says that the fork must happen in 3 months. Well good luck with that.

Changing the code to SW is much more risky than change a 1 -> 2 .

You are just trapped by the invisible HF monster. Buuaaaaa.  Roll Eyes

Carpe diem  -  understand the White Paper and mine honest.
Memo: 1AHUYNJKPfY7PjVK1hNQFo5LrdGixuiybw  -  https://metanet.icu/
The simple way is the genius way - in Moore's Law and Satoshi's WP we trust.
manselr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 854
Merit: 1000


Trusted Seller


View Profile
July 30, 2017, 02:47:47 PM
 #606

WTF?

I initially thought Satoshis Bitcoin was about economic, tech and game theory... -> perfect eCash for ALL.

Now I see here its rather about people and soap opera?

Looks like that many 'users' are mostly active in posting nonsense and horsing around, rather not in directing all our power and brains in a better solution, community and most important Bitcoin's REPUTATION to the inner and outer side this entire opera is seen in the end ...?

Back to work! Make Bitcoin great again - not soapy!


 Wink


My work here is to do pure analysis of WHY we have this opera:

Its all about a single line of the protocol

Where many would agree about, it is not a consensus pillar

Rather a user specific setting to allow free optimization and adjustments to market reactions

Such a minor param, that even Satoshi lost not much brain upon, rather sth like, it needs to be lifted when time is near and Moores law helps for the rest.

And due to growth and work scaling issues Satoshi resigned, not to be seen as a person, a king like leader, not to be a single point of failure and he diversified himself to a bunch of new dev persons. Carrying the responsibilities to next levels.

Now we need to do the next level, which is clearly diversifying TEAMs to spread responsibilites.

If core does like Satioshi did and showed it works, they need to step back (from behaving like a king) and lets diversify ideas, work and responsibilities through many, but friendly competing teams.

This is the big future for Satoshi Bitcoin!

Satoshi showed us all and we know, he will never come back as Satoshi, or this diversification mechanics will be obsolete.

Satoshi clearly said he didn't want his software forked and he didn't believe in several implementations of bitcoin:


I don't believe a second, compatible implementation of Bitcoin will ever be a good idea.  So much of the design depends on all nodes getting exactly identical results in lockstep that a second implementation would be a menace to the network.  The MIT license is compatible with all other licenses and commercial uses, so there is no need to rewrite it from a licensing standpoint.

Why are we even still disusing this? It's clear that the game theory behind how bitcoin works does not benefit from "several competing bitcoins".

If your ideas don't make the cut in the main branch it's because they aren't good enough. If you want to compete, then make your own altcoin and if people think it's better than the existing Bitcoin, then people will sell their Bitcoins for your supposed "better-than-current-Bitcoin" altcoin, but don't pretend to cause this hardfork drama every now an then thinking you are doing a favor to anyone, because you are just making the price crash, all for nothing because at the end of the day, people aren't going to trust hardforking amateurs with their money.

Im still waiting for a clear statement of Roger Ver claiming that he will sell all of his BTC for BCC. If he really thinks BCC is better than BTC, he surely will dump them right?

I said nothing about different Bitcoins. Only about different teams.

Anyone can create their own different repositories, a lot of people run their own bitcoin full node software, but these guys don't want that, they want to change consensus rules, creating a hardfork and thus creating a price crash, uncertainty, and all the hell that breaks loose during a god damn hardfork.

Mark my words: In november or so, we will have another price crash thanks to btc1/segwit2x hardfork attempt. If they did just shut the fuck up and let segwit run for an entire year then talk about a blocksize increase, but no, their ego says that the fork must happen in 3 months. Well good luck with that.

Changing the code to SW is much more risky than change a 1 -> 2 .

You are just trapped by the invisible HF monster. Buuaaaaa.  Roll Eyes

Segwit is opt in. If you don't like segwit then just get another client.

The market OBVIOUSLY wants segwit, look at how we went from $1800 to $3000.

The market OBVIOUSLY does not want two tokens. Look at XT crash, look at Classic crash, look at Unlimited crash, look at segwit2x/BIP148 crash.

We don't want two fucking bitcoins, it's not that hard to understand.

Telegram; @bitcointalkaccseller
hv_
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 543

Clean Code and Scale


View Profile WWW
July 30, 2017, 03:50:59 PM
 #607

WTF?

I initially thought Satoshis Bitcoin was about economic, tech and game theory... -> perfect eCash for ALL.

Now I see here its rather about people and soap opera?

Looks like that many 'users' are mostly active in posting nonsense and horsing around, rather not in directing all our power and brains in a better solution, community and most important Bitcoin's REPUTATION to the inner and outer side this entire opera is seen in the end ...?

Back to work! Make Bitcoin great again - not soapy!


 Wink


My work here is to do pure analysis of WHY we have this opera:

Its all about a single line of the protocol

Where many would agree about, it is not a consensus pillar

Rather a user specific setting to allow free optimization and adjustments to market reactions

Such a minor param, that even Satoshi lost not much brain upon, rather sth like, it needs to be lifted when time is near and Moores law helps for the rest.

And due to growth and work scaling issues Satoshi resigned, not to be seen as a person, a king like leader, not to be a single point of failure and he diversified himself to a bunch of new dev persons. Carrying the responsibilities to next levels.

Now we need to do the next level, which is clearly diversifying TEAMs to spread responsibilites.

If core does like Satioshi did and showed it works, they need to step back (from behaving like a king) and lets diversify ideas, work and responsibilities through many, but friendly competing teams.

This is the big future for Satoshi Bitcoin!

Satoshi showed us all and we know, he will never come back as Satoshi, or this diversification mechanics will be obsolete.

Satoshi clearly said he didn't want his software forked and he didn't believe in several implementations of bitcoin:


I don't believe a second, compatible implementation of Bitcoin will ever be a good idea.  So much of the design depends on all nodes getting exactly identical results in lockstep that a second implementation would be a menace to the network.  The MIT license is compatible with all other licenses and commercial uses, so there is no need to rewrite it from a licensing standpoint.

Why are we even still disusing this? It's clear that the game theory behind how bitcoin works does not benefit from "several competing bitcoins".

If your ideas don't make the cut in the main branch it's because they aren't good enough. If you want to compete, then make your own altcoin and if people think it's better than the existing Bitcoin, then people will sell their Bitcoins for your supposed "better-than-current-Bitcoin" altcoin, but don't pretend to cause this hardfork drama every now an then thinking you are doing a favor to anyone, because you are just making the price crash, all for nothing because at the end of the day, people aren't going to trust hardforking amateurs with their money.

Im still waiting for a clear statement of Roger Ver claiming that he will sell all of his BTC for BCC. If he really thinks BCC is better than BTC, he surely will dump them right?

I said nothing about different Bitcoins. Only about different teams.

Anyone can create their own different repositories, a lot of people run their own bitcoin full node software, but these guys don't want that, they want to change consensus rules, creating a hardfork and thus creating a price crash, uncertainty, and all the hell that breaks loose during a god damn hardfork.

Mark my words: In november or so, we will have another price crash thanks to btc1/segwit2x hardfork attempt. If they did just shut the fuck up and let segwit run for an entire year then talk about a blocksize increase, but no, their ego says that the fork must happen in 3 months. Well good luck with that.

Changing the code to SW is much more risky than change a 1 -> 2 .

You are just trapped by the invisible HF monster. Buuaaaaa.  Roll Eyes

Segwit is opt in. If you don't like segwit then just get another client.

The market OBVIOUSLY wants segwit, look at how we went from $1800 to $3000.

The market OBVIOUSLY does not want two tokens. Look at XT crash, look at Classic crash, look at Unlimited crash, look at segwit2x/BIP148 crash.

We don't want two fucking bitcoins, it's not that hard to understand.

Yeah, its hard to understand. And markets are hardest to.
Could you think of a premium for BCC that IS traded?
Hm.... Maket wants SW... Hm.. Not so sure

But finally market will tell us and make everybody understand but rather the hard way, thats for sure.

Carpe diem  -  understand the White Paper and mine honest.
Memo: 1AHUYNJKPfY7PjVK1hNQFo5LrdGixuiybw  -  https://metanet.icu/
The simple way is the genius way - in Moore's Law and Satoshi's WP we trust.
johnsmithx
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 598
Merit: 507

I don't buy nor sell anything here and never will.


View Profile
July 30, 2017, 06:59:11 PM
 #608

I'm sick of the dishonest lying, cheating...

Said a convicted felon who has been sentenced to a federal prison.

My list of 43(+3) reviewed Bitcoin forks | You don't have to download the pre-fork blockchain again for each fork! | Beware of fraudulent AWS accounts sellers and dangerous edu AWS codes! + My personal list of legit sellers and scammers | Never publicly reveal your btc addresses, ownership or any other details and stay very far away from anybody who asks you to! | The general rule of safe buying is: if the seller is a newbie, with no reputation, with no topic nor trust feedback, offering no vouches and/or selling from a locked or self-moderated topic and unwilling to go first or use escrow => AVOID. Always check the trust feedback first and make sure that you have enabled "Show untrusted feedback by default" in "Profile / Forum Profile Information".
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1072



View Profile
July 30, 2017, 08:53:24 PM
 #609


I don't like Theymos because of his censorhip, manipulation and lies:  https://medium.com/@johnblocke/a-brief-and-incomplete-history-of-censorship-in-r-bitcoin-c85a290fe43
Can I be unbanned from r/btc please!  Actually there is a list of people who would like to participate but don't agree with the r/btc agenda: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6qauyy/ver_theymos_and_his_censorship_can_go_to_hell/

I don't like Roger because of his censorship, manipulation and lies.

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
muyuu
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966
Merit: 1000



View Profile
July 30, 2017, 11:13:38 PM
 #610


I don't like Roger because of his censorship, manipulation and lies.

GPG ID: 7294199D - OTC ID: muyuu (470F97EB7294199D)
forum tea fund BTC 1Epv7KHbNjYzqYVhTCgXWYhGSkv7BuKGEU DOGE DF1eTJ2vsxjHpmmbKu9jpqsrg5uyQLWksM CAP F1MzvmmHwP2UhFq82NQT7qDU9NQ8oQbtkQ
600watt
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932
Merit: 1281



View Profile
July 31, 2017, 03:27:33 PM
 #611

I'm sick of the dishonest lying, cheating...

Said a convicted felon who has been sentenced to a federal prison.

i am not taking a side here but imho a federal prison sentence does not say anything about a persons reputation.
traincarswreck
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250


View Profile
July 31, 2017, 06:53:27 PM
 #612

i am not taking a side here but imho a federal prison sentence does not say anything about a persons reputation.
man I read so much stupid shit all day on the internet wtf is going on with this world!
mindrust
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498
Merit: 1458


Bitcoin or gtfo


View Profile
July 31, 2017, 07:31:59 PM
 #613


I don't like Roger because of his censorship, manipulation and lies.

r/btc is heavily censored. More than anything.

1- Any shitpost they made in r/btc can get upvoted to +200 in a matter of seconds. Especially if the title is about bashing the core devs. Everyday there are 5-10 posts like this. I never saw anything like this in r/bitcoin
2- There is a 10 minute time limit to post another message. Not sure if this applies to everybody.

r/btc is h*tler unlimited.




▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄    ▄▄▄▄                  ▄▄▄   ▄▄▄▄▄        ▄▄▄▄▄   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
 ▀████████████████▄  ████                 █████   ▀████▄    ▄████▀  ▄██████████████   ████████████▀  ▄█████████████▀  ▄█████████████▄
              ▀████  ████               ▄███▀███▄   ▀████▄▄████▀               ████   ████                ████                   ▀████
   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█████  ████              ████   ████    ▀██████▀      ██████████████▄   ████████████▀       ████       ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄████▀
   ██████████████▀   ████            ▄███▀     ▀███▄    ████        ████        ████  ████                ████       ██████████████▀
   ████              ████████████▀  ████   ██████████   ████        ████████████████  █████████████▀      ████       ████      ▀████▄
   ▀▀▀▀              ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀   ▀▀▀▀   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀        ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀        ▀▀▀▀       ▀▀▀▀        ▀▀▀▀▀

#1 CRYPTO CASINO & SPORTSBOOK
  WELCOME
BONUS
.INSTANT & FAST.
.TRANSACTION.....
.PROVABLY FAIR.
......& SECURE......
.24/7 CUSTOMER.
............SUPPORT.
BTC      |      ETH      |      LTC      |      XRP      |      XMR      |      BNB      |     more
freedomsr40
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 471
Merit: 500


View Profile
July 31, 2017, 07:37:41 PM
 #614

I'm just here to see how Loaded will reply now. If the deal can be concluded, it will be surely marked in history (and wikipedia as well).
600watt
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932
Merit: 1281



View Profile
July 31, 2017, 07:46:14 PM
 #615

i am not taking a side here but imho a federal prison sentence does not say anything about a persons reputation.
man I read so much stupid shit all day on the internet wtf is going on with this world!

that´s what I thought as well....   Cheesy
johnsmithx
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 598
Merit: 507

I don't buy nor sell anything here and never will.


View Profile
August 01, 2017, 04:54:48 AM
 #616

I'm sick of the dishonest lying, cheating...

Said a convicted felon who has been sentenced to a federal prison.

i am not taking a side here but imho a federal prison sentence does not say anything about a persons reputation.

If that wasn't a (bad) joke then you should go see a psychiatrist asap.

My list of 43(+3) reviewed Bitcoin forks | You don't have to download the pre-fork blockchain again for each fork! | Beware of fraudulent AWS accounts sellers and dangerous edu AWS codes! + My personal list of legit sellers and scammers | Never publicly reveal your btc addresses, ownership or any other details and stay very far away from anybody who asks you to! | The general rule of safe buying is: if the seller is a newbie, with no reputation, with no topic nor trust feedback, offering no vouches and/or selling from a locked or self-moderated topic and unwilling to go first or use escrow => AVOID. Always check the trust feedback first and make sure that you have enabled "Show untrusted feedback by default" in "Profile / Forum Profile Information".
BitcoinBarrel
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344
Merit: 1000


BTCAdvertising.com


View Profile WWW
August 01, 2017, 05:34:42 AM
 #617

WTF?

I initially thought Satoshis Bitcoin was about economic, tech and game theory... -> perfect eCash for ALL.

Now I see here its rather about people and soap opera?

Looks like that many 'users' are mostly active in posting nonsense and horsing around, rather not in directing all our power and brains in a better solution, community and most important Bitcoin's REPUTATION to the inner and outer side this entire opera is seen in the end ...?

Back to work! Make Bitcoin great again - not soapy!


 Wink


My work here is to do pure analysis of WHY we have this opera:

Its all about a single line of the protocol

Where many would agree about, it is not a consensus pillar

Rather a user specific setting to allow free optimization and adjustments to market reactions

Such a minor param, that even Satoshi lost not much brain upon, rather sth like, it needs to be lifted when time is near and Moores law helps for the rest.

And due to growth and work scaling issues Satoshi resigned, not to be seen as a person, a king like leader, not to be a single point of failure and he diversified himself to a bunch of new dev persons. Carrying the responsibilities to next levels.

Now we need to do the next level, which is clearly diversifying TEAMs to spread responsibilites.

If core does like Satioshi did and showed it works, they need to step back (from behaving like a king) and lets diversify ideas, work and responsibilities through many, but friendly competing teams.

This is the big future for Satoshi Bitcoin!

Satoshi showed us all and we know, he will never come back as Satoshi, or this diversification mechanics will be obsolete.

Satoshi clearly said he didn't want his software forked and he didn't believe in several implementations of bitcoin:


I don't believe a second, compatible implementation of Bitcoin will ever be a good idea.  So much of the design depends on all nodes getting exactly identical results in lockstep that a second implementation would be a menace to the network.  The MIT license is compatible with all other licenses and commercial uses, so there is no need to rewrite it from a licensing standpoint.

Why are we even still disusing this? It's clear that the game theory behind how bitcoin works does not benefit from "several competing bitcoins".

If your ideas don't make the cut in the main branch it's because they aren't good enough. If you want to compete, then make your own altcoin and if people think it's better than the existing Bitcoin, then people will sell their Bitcoins for your supposed "better-than-current-Bitcoin" altcoin, but don't pretend to cause this hardfork drama every now an then thinking you are doing a favor to anyone, because you are just making the price crash, all for nothing because at the end of the day, people aren't going to trust hardforking amateurs with their money.

Im still waiting for a clear statement of Roger Ver claiming that he will sell all of his BTC for BCC. If he really thinks BCC is better than BTC, he surely will dump them right?

+1 for Satoshi

JollyGood
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 317


View Profile
August 01, 2017, 10:21:53 AM
 #618

Im still waiting for a clear statement of Roger Ver claiming that he will sell all of his BTC for BCC. If he really thinks BCC is better than BTC, he surely will dump them right?

Well I look forward to seeing whether he will or not.

At the end of the day if Roger Ver is going to instigate the biggest tragedy on bitcoin since its conception simply because he has several hundred million dollars worth of coins then he should put his money where his mouth is.

First and foremost this is not the time for him or anyone else to play the role of bitcoin king. No need to change anything, everything can stay as is the status quo is fine. If he wants to go for it then that is his decision but he MUST dump all his BTC in favour of his newly found BTU otherwise it means he has no confidence in his own agenda.

Whether he does or not, Ver has lost respect in the majority of the crypto community.

SCAMS|| ADAB SOLUTIONS || BETKING BITSAFE & DEAN NOLAN || BITINGLE || CHANGELLY CHANGENOW & ATOMIC SWAP || COINSBIT || FURTCOIN || FLYP.ME || HITBTC || HOLY TRANSACTION || HUMANCOIN || HUMANITYONE || MINEXCOIN || MOBILEGO ||
|| P2PB2B || REPUBLIA || ROCK TRADING || SOVRANOCOIN || TOKENPAY || TRADESATOSHI || ULORD || VIBEO || 520bit/vitalii_invest/RoyalTeam ||
|| READ MY FULL SCAM LIST
nizamcc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1007



View Profile
August 05, 2017, 04:26:35 PM
 #619

Looks like they had a deal already. 19Mz2o9RDABT74SA9njZqMtJXKEzj2qUoH sent 40k BTC to 1PzGnXGvoGGtCcGpqzkJHebZVgM48VL2x4 in a single transaction, here's the tx id - 2248452e2122ff2d446565462cac276bbc8420c5874695a9b5c8e3bca8afa2b2
So there's still something shady behind BCH atm and a game is yet to begin. Let's wait for Aug 8 as that will prove to be the deciding day.
Looks like they were not interested in giving higher fee that's why even 10 sats/byte got them all their confirmations with a 0.00016201 BTC fee. (/sarcasm)
BitcoinHodler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 561


HODLing is an art, not just a word...


View Profile
August 05, 2017, 04:34:36 PM
 #620

Looks like they had a deal already. 19Mz2o9RDABT74SA9njZqMtJXKEzj2qUoH sent 40k BTC to 1PzGnXGvoGGtCcGpqzkJHebZVgM48VL2x4 in a single transaction, here's the tx id - 2248452e2122ff2d446565462cac276bbc8420c5874695a9b5c8e3bca8afa2b2
So there's still something shady behind BCH atm and a game is yet to begin. Let's wait for Aug 8 as that will prove to be the deciding day.
Looks like they were not interested in giving higher fee that's why even 10 sats/byte got them all their confirmations with a 0.00016201 BTC fee. (/sarcasm)

why do you think the 1PzGn... belongs to Roger Ver?
i can't find anything on that address linking it to anyone.

also a deal like that won't be as simple as sending a transaction! it is not 100 bucks it is about 130 million dollar, if you send it like that, the other person will take it and run.
what you do is using a multisig with some trusted third party with 3 keys. and these addresses are all starting with 1 (single key)

███████████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
███████████
#1
███████████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
███████████
BTC 
  ●
   BTC
  BTC   
.
    ▄▄▄▀▀▀▀
 ▄██▀
███        ▄▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄▄
▀███▄▄▄▄▀▀▀                 ▀▀▄▄
  ▀▀▀██████████████████████████▀
   ▄█▄     ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
    ▀▀██▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀
      ▄  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
      ▀██▄  ▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄
        ▀█▀██████████████▀▀
         ▀█▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
            █▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀
             ▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
.
     BTC
  BTC   
  ●
  BTC   
███████████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
███████████
███████████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
███████████
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!