Bitcoin Forum
September 24, 2018, 12:55:02 AM *
News: ♦♦ New info! Bitcoin Core users absolutely must upgrade to previously-announced 0.16.3 [Torrent]. All Bitcoin users should temporarily trust confirmations slightly less. More info.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
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 36 37 38 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Fuck: SegWit, LN, Blockstream, Core, Adam Back, and GMazwell  (Read 45873 times)
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2170
Merit: 1176



View Profile
March 26, 2017, 01:28:11 AM
 #21

Greg has openly called for full blocks and a fee market (which we have right now).

If blocks are empty, then when the reward drops to zero how will miners get paid?


miners will allow limitless space at no cost if they are left in charge of blockspace.

miners are not given that power or limitless control
EG.
2009
upper limit 32mb.. lower limit was 250kb
2013
upper limit 1mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 500kb(policy.h)
2015
upper limit 1mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 750kb(policy.h)
2016
upper limit 1mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 999kb(policy.h)

dynamics is for instance (dont knit pick the numbers just see the concept)
2017
upper limit 4mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 1.25mb(policy.h)
2018
upper limit 4mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 1.5mb(policy.h)
2018
upper limit 4mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 1.75mb(policy.h)
then a rethink about the network speed capability
2019
upper limit 8mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 2mb(policy.h)

policy becomes more fluid and adjustable based on MAJORITY nodes useragent display of their LOWER limit. but consensus.h stays static, pools see where a MAJORITY of nodes prefer their policy limit. and the MINORITY get a message that their policy.h needs changing or will be surpassed due to the minority having too low a policy.

but pools will not surpass the real main consensus.h limit

a few dynamic implementations are actually looking into having speedtests in the node to actually know what the node is actually capable of. to make nodes more self reliant on setting their limits without devs in a different county having to guess whats 'safe'

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Don't take any information given on this forum on face value. Please do your own due diligence & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. If you wish to seek legal FACTUAL advice, then seek the guidance of a LEGAL specialist.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1537750502
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537750502

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537750502
Reply with quote  #2

1537750502
Report to moderator
1537750502
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537750502

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537750502
Reply with quote  #2

1537750502
Report to moderator
1537750502
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537750502

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537750502
Reply with quote  #2

1537750502
Report to moderator
Killerpotleaf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616
Merit: 250



View Profile
March 26, 2017, 01:45:14 AM
 #22

wtv i believe that:
miners will centralize and stop checking each other's blocks in order allow limitless blockspace at no cost.

there incentive is the unbound 0fee TX demand

.
                           ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                       ▄▀▌         ▀▀█▄
                    ▄▀   █         ▄▀ █ ▀▄
                  ▄█     ▐        ▄    ▌  ▀▄
                ▄▄▀       █      ▀      ▌  ▓▀▄
              ▄███▄       ▐    ▄▀       █▄█   ▀
             ▄  ▌ ▀ ▀▀▄    █  █      ▄▄████▄▄   ▄
            ▓  ▐   ▀▄   ▀▀▄███▄▄ ▀▀    █ ▐    ▀▀▄▄
           ▌   ▓     █▄▄▄▄▀███▄      ▄▀   ▌      ▄█
          ▌    ▌    ▐███▀   ▄▄▄▄▀▄▄██▌    █    ▄▀  █
         ▓    █    ▄▀█ ▌          ████▄   ▐   ▀    ▄▌
        ▐▀▄   ▌  ▄▀ ▐   ▌         █ ▐   ▀▄███▄ ▀▀    ▌
        ▌  ▄ ▐ ▄▀  ▐    ▐ ▄▄▄█████▄▄ █   ▐███▄       ▐
       ▓    ███   ▐▀   ▄███████████████▄ ▓     ▀▄▄    ▌
       ▀ ▄███▀█   ▌  ████████████████████         ▀ ▄ ▐
      ▐▄▄▀██▀▀▄███▄ ██████████████████████▌▀▀▀   ▄▄▄▄▄▓▌
      █  █ █   ▀██▀████████████████████████▄           ▌
      ▌ ▌  ▐    ▌ ▀████████████████████████▌▀▄         ▌
      █▀   ▐▌  █  ▐████████████████████████▌   ▌      ▐▌
      ▐     ▌ ▐    ████████████████████████      ▀▄  ▐▓
       █    █ ▌     ██████████████████████▀        ███▌
        ▓▀▄ ▐▐    ▄ ▀████████████████████       ▄▄█▀▐█
         ▄ █████▄▄ ▄▄█ ▀██████████████▀     ▄ ▀ ▄▀  █
          ▀ █▀     ███  ▐ ▀▀▀▀██████▌  ▄▄▀▀   ▄▀   ▀
            ▌    ▒▐▀ ▌▀▄ ▀        ▀███     ▄▀    ▄
             ▀▄▄  ▀  ▐  ▌ ▀       ▄    ▀███
                ▀█    ▌  ▀▄█     ▄    ▄▀▀█  █▀
                   ▀▀▄█    ▄▌   █  ▄▀  ▄▐▀▀
                         ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀ ▀▀▀▀
.
      ██
     
     ▐█▌   ▄██████████████   ▄▄████████████▄   ██▄           ▄██   ▄█████████████▄
     ▐█▌ ▐██                ▐█▀            ██    ▀█▄       ▄██▀   ██▀           ▀██
     ▐█▌ ▐█▌                ██▌            ██      ▀█▄   ▄██▀     ██             ██
     ▐█▌  ▀██▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ▀██▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██▀        ▀████         ███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██
      ▀      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀             ▀              ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2170
Merit: 1176



View Profile
March 26, 2017, 01:55:27 AM
 #23

wtv i believe that:
miners will centralize and stop checking each other's blocks in order allow limitless blockspace at no cost.



1. miners make more money by competing and find any excuse they can to reject their competition..to have as many ACCEPTABLE blocks on the chain that the nodes can accept to see the rewards so that pools can spend their 'winnings'.. so following what nodes allow = able to spend winnings
2. pools can build any length height of blocks they want(privately). but if nodes reject them.. then places like coinbase and bitfinex are not accepting those blocks. and so the pools are not going to get paid because the exchange nodes dont see their(rejected) blocks

EG
NODES rejected this block of 1.000250mb in 3seconds.
Code:
2017-01-29 06:59:12 Requesting block 000000000000000000cf208f521de0424677f7a87f2f278a1042f38d159565f5
2017-01-29 06:59:15 ERROR: AcceptBlock: bad-blk-length, size limits failed (code 16)

and just like all other orphans that happen weekly(for many different reasons).. that work done to produce that non accepting block. is not acceptable to nodes. meaning pools wont be able to spend the rewards... once its in the reject/orphan trash.. its gone and forgotton

pools can continue building ontop it all they like(privately).. but if the node network reject it.. then pools cant spend it. pools end up wasting time playing hot-potato privately between themselves and exchanges never have to accept it. so its wasting the pools time for them to play silly games in their own little corner, because once its time to cashout.. they cant

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Don't take any information given on this forum on face value. Please do your own due diligence & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. If you wish to seek legal FACTUAL advice, then seek the guidance of a LEGAL specialist.
Alex.BTC
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42
Merit: 0


View Profile
March 26, 2017, 05:00:57 AM
 #24

Would you please stop obsessing over me?  It's creepy.

I am not your mommy.

You do not get to determine how I spend my time, you do not get to restrict what I say or believe.  I don't force anyone to do anything. You will you make me cow down and obey you through threatening me by lying to the public to try to raise a mob of idiots against me, and even if you do manage to get me killed you will not stop bitcoin, you will not convert it to the centralized coin you seem to so desperately want.

So give it a break.





Dear Greg (and other Core developers),

Your response is deeply worrying me, I've decided to stop being just a spectator and register to make a comment, I hope this will help you and Core in some way.

Let me just begin by stating that I've been a long time Core supporter.

When Core released a new version of their Bitcoin software, I knew there was a certain level of quality control as well as forward thinking, a certain level of trust. It is because of that trust that I've never even considered looking at other alternatives, until now.

As a general fan and user of digital currency, I have no allegiance to Core/BU/XT/Miners or who ever, I don't feel personally attached to any party, I am just interested in Bitcoin's general progress, how Bitcoin will change the world for the better and make people's lives easier. I am also a realist, that means I will only make judgment base on practical matters instead of some arbitrary ideal moral high ground. So, everything I am posting here will be as neutral as you can get from a Bitcoin user.

With that out of the way, I must say, what happened in the past few months have really begun to change my perspective on Core.

For example the current BU fiasco, my understanding is that, a year ago some miners wanted 8MB blocks, some wanted 4MB, there was the usual struggle and bargaining between users/miners/nodes/developers, eventually the miners made a compromise, the "Hong Kong Agreement" was made, in which miners agreed to support Segwit and a 2MB block size increase, Adam Back signed the agreement, only to have you call them "dipshits" and broke the agreement afterwards. Source.

Because of that, now, a year later, the block chain has reached the 1MB block size limit, there is a huge tx backlog and as a result the tx fee has sky rocketed, users are affected and many have moved their money to alt coins. The miners have no choice but to choose the other best options: Bitcoin Unlimited.

So how can anyone honestly blame the miners and BU at this point? Seriously, even if you're paid to do so, deep down you must know this crisis was coming a year ago, and it was Core's responsibility to prepare for it.

Core and some of its fans (some are obviously paid) keep repeating miners and BU are evil because they are splitting the chain, sure you can say that, but seriously, what did you expect them to do. They already compromised and was ignored, now there is a tx backlog, Bitcoin is losing ground to competitions, Core is sitting on their asses holding the code hostage, breaking agreements, making insults, what else are the miners supposed to do. What did Core expect them to do?

I am not even defending miners/BU here, it's all about the block size limit, I am using a pure practical pov: If BU didn't exist, miners would have switched to something else without the 1M limit, simple as that.

Anyone who keep pointing their fingers at miners/BU is just trying to ignore the fact that Core did nothing about the 1MB limit for years.

The thing that really irritates me though, is that the block size limit wasn't even in the white paper, so why would Core hold the code hostage and refuse to increase the limit from 1MB? 1MB is such a small number, how can you even justify not increasing it?

The fact is many Core developers were openly supporting block size increase, but then became strongly opposed to it after they started working for Blockstream, now I don't care for all the conspiracy theories, but can you people just come out and explain why the sudden change of heart?

I find that really puzzling, it's like watching people who used to love pizza, suddenly hate pizza after they work for McDonalds, it just doesn't make sense. Mind you these Core members didn't just simply change their taste, they went from openly supporting raising block size limit to openly hating it with a passion.

Every explanations I've read from Core in the past few months, can basically translate to: "Our Segwit and LN will be soooooo great, who cares what people actually need right now, stop talking to me, I don't care, I already know what you want, if you don't agree with me, you're just stupid."

If Segwit and LN is so great, it'll naturally be adopted when there is a real demand. Core already had the market share and user trust, they already have the golden goose, so why do they have to kill the goose just to get the Segwit golden egg?

Core kept chanting how great Segwit and LN are, it may be true, but their actions tell me they are really insecure about them, otherwise they wouldn't need to artificially create a crisis just to force everyone to use it, I don't know about you, but I believe actions always speak louder than words.

Satoshi saw this tx backlog coming when he was designing Bitcoin, the block size limit isn't even in the white paper, the 1MB limit was only a temporary measure to stop spam in the beginning.

Satoshi's white paper clearly states that consensus should be made base on CPU power, not the number of nodes or IP addresses, not the number of developers, not online poll ratings, not social media, not forum polls, just CPU power. Satoshi made this decision not because he trusted the miners, but because he expected everyone to be selfish and act on their own interests, and of all the pieces in the ecosystem, hash power is the most difficult to fake and come by.

Miners are constantly in an arm race, hash rate never stop climbing, in this constant zero sum survival of the fittest, they get nothing the moment they stop competing, eventually miners become so focused on competing with each other, fine tuning every last knob to gain an hash rate advantage.

Regardless of what anyone else is doing, miners are always at maximum greed under the highest pressure, like a piano wire.

And that is the beauty of the Bitcoin design: All miners worry about is turning electricity into profit, they don't even care who is running the show, they ignore everyone else equally, because no amount of sucking up to users or developers will help their hash rate, but, miners do care about the stability of the ecosystem, because their profit depends on it. Given a choice they'd rather not make any decision that may shake the grounds and risk their profit.

So, in a world full of greed, lies, mistrusts, secret schemes, accusations and back stabs, miner's indiscriminately pure and focused self serving nature makes them the perfect center of balance. When nothing is reliable and nobody can be trusted, the simplest and purest form of greed becomes the constant.

As a digital currency, having consensus base on hash rate is why Bitcoin succeeded while other digital currency failed.

Miners generally don't care about what anyone else is doing, unless some other part of the system did something really short sighted (read: stupid) to tip the balance, and that is EXACTLY what Core did, miners tried to make compromises but were ignored and insulted, now the back log is full, miners are simply reacting in self defense.

Anyone who still blames the miners at this point, simply don't understand Bitcoin and why it succeeded.

Regardless of what you think of BU or Segwit, from a development point of view, Core simply failed, it failed because it ignored user's immediate and practical needs. They sat on their fat asses for a year, making promises after promises on some ideal vision, while there is a huge tx backlog on ground floor.

There are good and responsible Core members, but unfortunately a lot of Core members, especially the loudest ones, seem to be focused on excuses, launching personal attacks, making empty promises, making threats, playing victims, while ignoring practical and immediate user needs.

Greg, you may have a big ego, but you're not Bill Gates, and Bitcoin Core is not Microsoft Windows, block chain technology is young and there are competitions, Bitcoin users are mostly early adopters, they are sharp and they like trying new things, you can't play Bill Gates and use Microsoft tactics and still expect to win.

It is true that you currently have some status and spot light, you have your financial backings, you have your crew and echo chamber, you have your side chain patents, from your pov it really looks like you can do whatever you want, insult people, ignore users, and nobody can do anything about it.

But, in this field anything can happen in a year, so many new and shiny things have come and gone.

Pride goes before a fall, Microsoft, AOL, Yahoo all spent billions and failed because they ignored their users. Blockstream only have $75 million, they already made a big mistake, but for some reason they're not turning around, instead acting even cockier than Microsoft.

Judging from how you ignored Satoshi's email and only arrive back to the scene years after Satoshi has gone. I have reason to believe you're the type of person that lacks intuitive foresight.

So I am going to give you an advice: You're on the wrong side of history, but you still have a chance to turn around.

You can't treat your users like they are idiots, they might not find out the truth the first day, they might be fooled by censoring tactics, but eventually there will be a crack, and once people find out you've been lying to them, the trust is gone forever, they'll never trust you again.

Look at the Iraq war, the so called WMD, look at Powell, there were massive misinformation campaign to push people to war, emotions were high, lies mixed with half truths were flying around, SJWs and useful idiots were screaming on top of their lungs, so many people were convinced there were 100% right.

But a decade later, everyone just remember Powell as the guy who lied on TV holding a bottle of white powder.

Where do you think you will be in 10 years, Greg?

Are you going to be remembered as someone who made Bitcoin better, or someone who missed the Bitcoin boat twice?

Bitcoin Core team, this is for you: You had your chance and you failed, no matter who you think you are, you're on the wrong side of history and I don't believe in you people anymore.

And before you try to point fingers and accusing me of helping a side, I am telling you, I don't care who wins, I am tired of your BS and I am going to ditch Bitcoins until things clear.

I am not going to risk my hard earned money on a bunch of short sighted arrogant insecure emotional lying pricks and bitches stuck with messiah complexes who scream a lot and talk big but can't solve simple and practical problems right in front of their noses and screw things up for everyone then turn around and play victims like some entitled pre-adolescent brat asking for a kick in the face.

That's all.

Alex
iamnotback
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 258



View Profile
March 26, 2017, 05:23:34 AM
 #25

Would you please stop obsessing over me?  It's creepy.

I am not your mommy.

You do not get to determine how I spend my time, you do not get to restrict what I say or believe.  I don't force anyone to do anything. You will you make me cow down and obey you through threatening me by lying to the public to try to raise a mob of idiots against me, and even if you do manage to get me killed you will not stop bitcoin, you will not convert it to the centralized coin you seem to so desperately want.

So give it a break.

THE MAJORITY is with you 21 million %.

Why don't the BU supporters understand that Core has been told by the majority of the wealth (i.e. the whales) that if they fuck with the block size using a HF, then MP will change the PoW hash (or some other method I haven't yet determined), and destroy their HF and bankrupt/punish miners who mine on it.
jonald_fyookball
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302
Merit: 1002


Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political


View Profile
March 26, 2017, 05:30:58 AM
 #26


brilliant post Alex, thank you.

I almost feel like you are channeling the wisdom of Satoshi (except for maybe the last paragraph lol)

Hope others will chime in with their sentiments on these revelations, because we all want Bitcoin to succeed.

cjmoles
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078
Merit: 1016


View Profile WWW
March 26, 2017, 05:55:57 AM
 #27

Why is everybody so mad?  Nothing is being lost!  It's just being transferred into less antiquated and more innovative chains....conflict inspires innovation (https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8329/3df29cb32ca6e6cbceede3d12ce90aa1a2f0.pdf).  That's just the way things work....all is not lost, nor will it be lost....it will just evolve onto more efficient platforms, laissez faire!
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2170
Merit: 1176



View Profile
March 26, 2017, 06:04:03 AM
 #28

alex.btc, a nice fresh well wrote post. and to highlight one point you made

You can't treat your users like they are idiots, they might not find out the truth the first day, they might be fooled by censoring tactics, but eventually there will be a crack, and once people find out you've been lying to them, the trust is gone forever, they'll never trust you again.

segwit promises: 2mb-4mb block promise when activated.
segwit reality:at activation.. nothing.. people using standard UTXO (native/legacy tx keypair) will have their data stuck in the base block limit of 1mb (no gain for them). only segwit utxo spenders(users who have funds on segwit tx keypair) will have part of the tx data outside the base block.
meaning it requires people to spend their native utxo and move the funds into segwit keys.. and then when they spend the segwit UTXO then they are helping with the ratio inside and outside the base block.*

segwit promises: malleability fix promise when activated.
segwit reality:at activation.. nothing.. people using standard UTXO (native/legacy tx keypair) will have their data stuck in the base block and can still do malleability. only segwit utxo (segwit tx keypair) will move part of the tx data outside the base block. meaning it requires people spend their native utxo and move the funds into segwit keys.. and then when they spend the segwit UTXO then they are helping with the not malleating because they are disarmed.*

segwit promises: quadratic sigop fix promise when activated.
segwit reality:at activation.. nothing.. people using standard UTXO (native/legacy tx keypair) will have their data stuck in the base block and can still do sigop spam. only segwit utxo (segwit tx keypair) will move part of the tx data outside the base block. meaning it requires people spend their native utxo and move the funds into segwit keys.. and then when they spend the segwit UTXO then they are helping with the not sigop spamming because they are disarmed.*

*the issues:
trying to move 46mill native UTXO.. is a laugh to think will be 100% accomplished, especially in any rational time or ability to achieve
thinking 100% of users will voluntarily use segwit keys and stick to segwit.
thinking that malicious spammers/attacker would voluntarily use segwit keys, voluntarily disarming and de-spamming themselves.. is the opposite of the motives of said malicious spammers.

infact segwit opens up new attack vectors for these spammers. which will make it even harder for people to move funds across. and all this having to move funds just to try disarming themselves will be ADDING to the mempool spam

dont expect to get anywhere near 2mb of 'capacity' just like we didnt get 7tx/s in bitcoin 2009-2017 even when maths estimations suggested it was possible

segwit promises: keeps node costs down
segwit reality: 2mb of data is still 2mb of data for a full node no matter if the signatures are in the middle of a tx or end of a tx.. yea you can claim enabling prunned or no witness mode.. but then your no longer the upstream tier of a full node. and just part of the downstream lower tier cesspools of not full data nodes, thus might aswell just be spv/litenodes. they are not counted/treated as "full nodes"

segwit promises: keeps node counts up
segwit reality: enabling prunned or no witness mode.. they are no longer the upstream tier of a full node network. and just part of the downstream lower tier cesspits of not full data nodes, thus might aswell just be spv/litenodes. they are not counted/treated as "full nodes"
moving non segwit nodes off the network. again drops the full node count.

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Don't take any information given on this forum on face value. Please do your own due diligence & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. If you wish to seek legal FACTUAL advice, then seek the guidance of a LEGAL specialist.
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974
Merit: 1597


GUNBOT Licenses up to 70% OFF - 'GrumpyKitty'.


View Profile WWW
March 26, 2017, 07:21:19 AM
 #29

-snip-
For example the current BU fiasco, my understanding is that, a year ago some miners wanted 8MB blocks, some wanted 4MB, there was the usual struggle and bargaining between users/miners/nodes/developers, eventually the miners made a compromise, the "Hong Kong Agreement" was made, in which miners agreed to support Segwit and a 2MB block size increase, Adam Back signed the agreement, only to have you call them "dipshits" and broke the agreement afterwards. Source.
This is factually wrong. It was F2Pool who broke the agreement, effectively making it void. There was no explicit mention of a 2 MB block size increase, rather a HF proposal with a HF proposal. Luke-jr ended up delivering such a proposal, even after the agreement was void. Your bullshit story about previously supporting Core, but now you're dissapointed/don't is bullshit. BTU people are really desperate with these stunts.

Satoshi saw this tx backlog coming when he was designing Bitcoin, the block size limit isn't even in the white paper, the 1MB limit was only a temporary measure to stop spam in the beginning.
What Satoshi saw or not is completely irrelevant today. He can't predict the future.

Satoshi's white paper clearly states that consensus should be made base on CPU power, not the number of nodes or IP addresses, not the number of developers, not online poll ratings, not social media, not forum polls, just CPU power. Satoshi made this decision not because he trusted the miners, but because he expected everyone to be selfish and act on their own interests, and of all the pieces in the ecosystem, hash power is the most difficult to fake and come by.
Here we go again; this is before ASICs came to be, something that Satoshi failed to predict. Current miners do not control nor decide what Bitcoin is.

The thing that really irritates me though, is that the block size limit wasn't even in the white paper, so why would Core hold the code hostage and refuse to increase the limit from 1MB? 1MB is such a small number, how can you even justify not increasing it?
Random passengers with the IQ of a baboon want to be the ones deciding how the plane's engine is going to be built. Roll Eyes The limits are technological.

I am not going to risk my hard earned money on a bunch of short sighted arrogant insecure emotional lying pricks and bitches stuck with messiah complexes who scream a lot and talk big but can't solve simple and practical problems right in front of their noses and screw things up for everyone then turn around play victims like some entitled pre-adolescent brat asking for a kick in the face.
-snip-
Here it is, you reveal your true colors; either you're: 1) Completely uneducated and ignorant; 2) Paid shill by Ver company (or other).

brilliant post Alex, thank you.

I almost feel like you are channeling the wisdom of Satoshi (except for maybe the last paragraph lol)

Hope others will chime in with their sentiments on these revelations, because we all want Bitcoin to succeed.
That article is full of lies and bullshit. It is shameful to say that it is brilliant. You are a disgrace to Bitcoin and everything it stands for.

.FORTUNE.JACK.
      ▄▄███████▄▄
   ▄████▀▀ ▄ ██████▄
  ████ ▄▄███ ████████
 █████▌▐███▌ ▀▄ ▀█████
███████▄██▀▀▀▀▄████████
█████▀▄▄▄▄█████████████
████▄▄▄▄ █████████████
 ██████▌ ███▀████████
  ███████▄▀▄████████
   ▀█████▀▀███████▀
      ▀▀██████▀▀
         
         █
...FortuneJack.com                                             
...THE BIGGEST BITCOIN GAMBLING SITE
       ▄▄█████████▄▄
    ▄█████████████████▄
  ▄█████████████████████▄
 ▄██
█████████▀███████████▄
██████████▀   ▀██████████
█████████▀       ▀█████████
████████           ████████
████████▄   ▄ ▄   ▄████████
██████████▀   ▀██████████
 ▀██
█████████████████████▀
  ▀██
███████████████████▀
    ▀█████████████████▀
       ▀▀█████████▀▀
#JACKMATE
WIN 1 BTC
▄█████████████████████████▄
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████████▀█████▀██████████
███████▀░░▀░░░░░▀░░▀███████
██████▌░░░░░░░░░░░░░▐██████
██████░░░░██░░░██░░░░██████
█████▌░░░░▀▀░░░▀▀░░░░▐█████
██████▄░░▄▄▄░░░▄▄▄░░▄██████
████████▄▄███████▄▄████████

███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
▀█████████████████████████▀
DGulari
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1161
Merit: 1000


Create Your Decentralized Life


View Profile
March 26, 2017, 07:25:33 AM
 #30

Would you please stop obsessing over me?  It's creepy.

I am not your mommy.

You do not get to determine how I spend my time, you do not get to restrict what I say or believe.  I don't force anyone to do anything. You will you make me cow down and obey you through threatening me by lying to the public to try to raise a mob of idiots against me, and even if you do manage to get me killed you will not stop bitcoin, you will not convert it to the centralized coin you seem to so desperately want.

So give it a break.
Obsessing?  What a fuckin' ego.  Who's obsessing?  

You are a fuckwad for taking Blockstream money and intentionally crippling the network with low capacity to drive demand for LN.  

Facts are facts.  You guys Core/Blockstream all got found out by the community who decided that maneuver was total bullshit.  

Now go fuck yourself.  

I know you are not my mommy, but I do believe you are someone's mommy.  You look like a fat pudgy soft old lady.  That beard doesn't do much to bring about a tiny shred of manhood.  You are clearly a blobby giggly buffoon.  Time to let the network take its new direction and realize Blockstream isn't going to own Bitcoin via LN.  

Now go fuck right off like a mommy should.

Current miners do not control nor decide what Bitcoin is.
Who does then Lauda?  Fucking Blockstream and their paid group of takeover artists?  No fucking way. 

Miners still control.  Go run your stupid chain with no miners and have your fucking LN as you wish.  The real Bitcoin is going to continue the way Satoshi wanted it. 

Blockstream tried to take over.  People figured it out.  This isn't really that complicated.

        ▄▄███████████▄▄       
     ▄██████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████▄   
    ████▀             ▀████▄ 
  ▄███▀    ▄▄▄████▄▄    ▀████
▐███     ██████████▀     ███▌
 ███▌    ██████▀▀        ▄███▌
▐███    ▐████▄      ▄▄▄██████▌
▐███▌  ▄████████▄▄██████████▀
████████▀█████████████▀▀▀   
  ████▌    ▀▀██████▀▀      ▄▄
   ▀████▄              ▄▄████▌
     ▀█████▄▄▄    ▄▄▄██████▀▀
       ▀▀██████████████▀▀     
             ▀▀▀▀▀▀           



        ▄▄███████████▄▄       
     ▄██████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████▄   
    ████▀             ▀████▄ 
  ▄███▀    ▄▄▄████▄▄    ▀████
▐███     ██████████▀     ███▌
 ███▌    ██████▀▀        ▄███▌
▐███    ▐████▄      ▄▄▄██████▌
▐███▌  ▄████████▄▄██████████▀
████████▀█████████████▀▀▀   
  ████▌    ▀▀██████▀▀      ▄▄
   ▀████▄              ▄▄████▌
     ▀█████▄▄▄    ▄▄▄██████▀▀
       ▀▀██████████████▀▀     
             ▀▀▀▀▀▀           
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2170
Merit: 1176



View Profile
March 26, 2017, 07:31:58 AM
 #31

-snip-
For example the current BU fiasco, my understanding is that, a year ago some miners wanted 8MB blocks, some wanted 4MB, there was the usual struggle and bargaining between users/miners/nodes/developers, eventually the miners made a compromise, the "Hong Kong Agreement" was made, in which miners agreed to support Segwit and a 2MB block size increase, Adam Back signed the agreement, only to have you call them "dipshits" and broke the agreement afterwards. Source.
This is factually wrong. It was F2Pool who broke the agreement, effectively making it void. There was no explicit mention of a 2 MB block size increase, rather a HF proposal with a HF proposal. Luke-jr ended up delivering such a proposal, even after the agreement was void. Your bullshit story about previously supporting Core, but now you're dissapointed/don't is bullshit. BTU people are really desperate with these stunts.
lauda go research better. lukes proposal wasnt a meaningful one. it was a drop of the blocksize and then only slowly climb to take YEARS to get to 2mb.
you can twist you crap all day but the truth is luke gave an empty gesture, not something of real utility


The thing that really irritates me though, is that the block size limit wasn't even in the white paper, so why would Core hold the code hostage and refuse to increase the limit from 1MB? 1MB is such a small number, how can you even justify not increasing it?
Random passengers with the IQ of a baboon want to be the ones deciding how the plane's engine is going to be built. Roll Eyes The limits are technological.
the 1mb was not about technological limit. it was set as a easy number that was several times above the utility at the time (under 250k/block.. even back then satoshi knew that 2mb would be ok in 2011...
even in 2015 they knew 8mb was "safe" but the compromise was 2mb of REAL BASE BLOCK NATIVE TX UTILITY.. and 2 years on... core is still fighting against it even when technology has moved on. even the great china firewall debate has moved soo much that china's internet within china is faster than the average speed of the rest of the world now.
oh and china use solar and wind now.. no longer in rice paddy fields using coal furnaces..
as for the intellect of people:
random people who cant even tell the difference between java and C++.. but think they can read bitcoin...
or the random people that have short attention spans


I am not going to risk my hard earned money on a bunch of short sighted arrogant insecure emotional lying pricks and bitches stuck with messiah complexes who scream a lot and talk big but can't solve simple and practical problems right in front of their noses and screw things up for everyone then turn around play victims like some entitled pre-adolescent brat asking for a kick in the face.
-snip-
Here it is, you reveal your true colors; either you're: 1) Completely uneducated and ignorant; 2) Paid shill by Ver company (or other).

let me guess anyone not kissing lord gmaxwell ass must be paid by someone else. seriously only in your world are people paid to have an opinion, kind of a shame you have wasted the last year not even learning bitcoin.


brilliant post Alex, thank you.

I almost feel like you are channeling the wisdom of Satoshi (except for maybe the last paragraph lol)

Hope others will chime in with their sentiments on these revelations, because we all want Bitcoin to succeed.
That article is full of lies and bullshit. It is shameful to say that it is brilliant. You are a disgrace to Bitcoin and everything it stands for.
lauda. please spend more time learning C++, reading code, learning bitcoin.
its been a year, please put some effort into it.
lets not see you in 2018 still never having read about bitcoin.

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Don't take any information given on this forum on face value. Please do your own due diligence & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. If you wish to seek legal FACTUAL advice, then seek the guidance of a LEGAL specialist.
TooDumbForBitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498
Merit: 1001


best digital asset exchange


View Profile
March 26, 2017, 07:32:06 AM
 #32


<...really long post from newbie trying to get to 10-post count in one post  ...>


To summarize this rather wordy appeal:

1.  Hey, Core, please post your technical reasons for controlling the block size.  I'm not able or willing to search for the other 200 times this has been explained, despite having followed this issue for a long time.

2.  Hey, Core, you and Blockstream are identical.

3.  Miners hate high fees.  You can tell they hate high fees because they take the transactions with the highest fees first, instead of taking the oldest transactions first.  

4.  Satoshi's vision.  (NOTE:  Why does nobody post about Satoshi's hearing, or his sense of smell?  It's always his vision.)

5.  I'm not emotionally invested, but Core/Blockstream are doody heads and I quit.

                ▄▄█▄
             ▄█████████▄
           ▐██▀  ███ ▀▀██
           ▐█    ███   ▐█
           ▐█   ▄███▄  ▐█
           ▐█████████████
        ▄▄██████▀███▀██████▄▄
        █▀▀ █    ███   ▐▌ ▀██
        █▌  █    ███   ▐▌  ▐█
        █▄▄▄█████████████▄▄██
     ██████████████████████████▄
     █▀ ▐▌  █    ███   ▐▌  █  ▐█
     █  ▐▌  █    ███   ▐▌  ▐  ▐█
     █████▄▄█▄▄▄▄███▄▄▄██▄▄█████
     █   ▌  █▀▀▀▀███▀▀▀▐▌  ▐  ▐█
     █▄ ▐▌  █    ███   ▐▌  ▐  ▐█
     ██████▄█▄   ███  ▄▐█▄██████
     ▀▀███████████████████████▀▀
          ▀▀█████████████▀▀
               ▀▀▀█▀▀
                       ▄             ▓▓    ▓▓      ▓ ▓▓
                   ▐▓  ▓▌        ▓   ▓▓    ▓▓     ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▄▄
                 ▄▄▐▓▄ ▓▌▓  ▄  ▐▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓   ▓▓▓▓▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓        ▓▌
               ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▄▄
               ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▌
             ▄▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀▀▀▀▀            ▀▀▀▀▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓
             ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀▀                                         ▀▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓
           ▄▓▓▀▀                                                        ▀▀▀▓▄▄
       ▄ ▀                                                                    ▀▀▄

.........CRYPTO SOUK
                ▄▄█▄
             ▄█████████▄
           ▐██▀  ███ ▀▀██
           ▐█    ███   ▐█
           ▐█   ▄███▄  ▐█
           ▐█████████████
        ▄▄██████▀███▀██████▄▄
        █▀▀ █    ███   ▐▌ ▀██
        █▌  █    ███   ▐▌  ▐█
        █▄▄▄█████████████▄▄██
     ██████████████████████████▄
     █▀ ▐▌  █    ███   ▐▌  █  ▐█
     █  ▐▌  █    ███   ▐▌  ▐  ▐█
     █████▄▄█▄▄▄▄███▄▄▄██▄▄█████
     █   ▌  █▀▀▀▀███▀▀▀▐▌  ▐  ▐█
     █▄ ▐▌  █    ███   ▐▌  ▐  ▐█
     ██████▄█▄   ███  ▄▐█▄██████
     ▀▀███████████████████████▀▀
          ▀▀█████████████▀▀
               ▀▀▀█▀▀
MemoryDealers
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1034
Merit: 1050



View Profile WWW
March 26, 2017, 07:54:50 AM
 #33

This is exactly what is happening to Bitcoin due to Core's roadmap.
They may be expert programers,  but they don't understand that Bitcoin is only valuable if it is useful, and their roadmap is destroying its usefulness.
Full blocks and the high fees and backlog that they create are destroying Bitcoin's comparative advantage and driving people to use alt coins instead.

TooDumbForBitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498
Merit: 1001


best digital asset exchange


View Profile
March 26, 2017, 08:04:37 AM
 #34

This is exactly what is happening to Bitcoin due to Core's roadmap.
They may be expert programers,  but they don't understand that Bitcoin is only valuable if it is useful, and their roadmap is destroying its usefulness.
Full blocks and the high fees and backlog that they create are destroying Bitcoin's comparative advantage and driving people to use alt coins instead.


Roger now using his vast wealth to patronize the arts.  Thanks, Roger!  Did you color that yourself?  Was it numbered?

Maybe it's not part of Roger's art collection.  Maybe it's part of his book collection.

Maybe it's a graphical representation of his crypto holdings over time.  Please keep us updated, Roger!

                ▄▄█▄
             ▄█████████▄
           ▐██▀  ███ ▀▀██
           ▐█    ███   ▐█
           ▐█   ▄███▄  ▐█
           ▐█████████████
        ▄▄██████▀███▀██████▄▄
        █▀▀ █    ███   ▐▌ ▀██
        █▌  █    ███   ▐▌  ▐█
        █▄▄▄█████████████▄▄██
     ██████████████████████████▄
     █▀ ▐▌  █    ███   ▐▌  █  ▐█
     █  ▐▌  █    ███   ▐▌  ▐  ▐█
     █████▄▄█▄▄▄▄███▄▄▄██▄▄█████
     █   ▌  █▀▀▀▀███▀▀▀▐▌  ▐  ▐█
     █▄ ▐▌  █    ███   ▐▌  ▐  ▐█
     ██████▄█▄   ███  ▄▐█▄██████
     ▀▀███████████████████████▀▀
          ▀▀█████████████▀▀
               ▀▀▀█▀▀
                       ▄             ▓▓    ▓▓      ▓ ▓▓
                   ▐▓  ▓▌        ▓   ▓▓    ▓▓     ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▄▄
                 ▄▄▐▓▄ ▓▌▓  ▄  ▐▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓   ▓▓▓▓▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓        ▓▌
               ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▄▄
               ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▌
             ▄▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀▀▀▀▀            ▀▀▀▀▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓
             ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀▀                                         ▀▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓
           ▄▓▓▀▀                                                        ▀▀▀▓▄▄
       ▄ ▀                                                                    ▀▀▄

.........CRYPTO SOUK
                ▄▄█▄
             ▄█████████▄
           ▐██▀  ███ ▀▀██
           ▐█    ███   ▐█
           ▐█   ▄███▄  ▐█
           ▐█████████████
        ▄▄██████▀███▀██████▄▄
        █▀▀ █    ███   ▐▌ ▀██
        █▌  █    ███   ▐▌  ▐█
        █▄▄▄█████████████▄▄██
     ██████████████████████████▄
     █▀ ▐▌  █    ███   ▐▌  █  ▐█
     █  ▐▌  █    ███   ▐▌  ▐  ▐█
     █████▄▄█▄▄▄▄███▄▄▄██▄▄█████
     █   ▌  █▀▀▀▀███▀▀▀▐▌  ▐  ▐█
     █▄ ▐▌  █    ███   ▐▌  ▐  ▐█
     ██████▄█▄   ███  ▄▐█▄██████
     ▀▀███████████████████████▀▀
          ▀▀█████████████▀▀
               ▀▀▀█▀▀
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 1159


Hire BOUNTYPORTALS>Bounty management goo.gl/pSzJuA


View Profile WWW
March 26, 2017, 08:11:43 AM
 #35

For example the current BU fiasco, my understanding is that, a year ago some miners wanted 8MB blocks, some wanted 4MB, there was the usual struggle and bargaining between users/miners/nodes/developers, eventually the miners made a compromise, the "Hong Kong Agreement" was made, in which miners agreed to support Segwit and a 2MB block size increase, Adam Back signed the agreement, only to have you call them "dipshits" and broke the agreement afterwards. Source.
Looking back, the HK agreement was worthless from the get go. Do you remember when Adam Black signed it as "an individual" instead of signing as CEO of Blockstream?

Not long before the HK agreement was signed, Mike Hern rage-quit Bitcoin development, and this gave a lot of momentum away from bitcointalk, r/bitcoin, and most importantly, away from Core. Mike Hern rage-quitting was heavily reported by the Bitcoin related media, was even reported by the MSM, and the general consensus was that Core was standing in the way of Bitcoin development. The way things were going, it would not be very long until Core would lose all control over Bitcoin development, and the users would get what they wanted -- larger blocks that accommodate the growth of Bitcoin transactions. I am not even sure if the HK meeting was even scheduled at this point.

Once the HK agreement was signed, cold water was effectively thrown on the above movement and momentum because the community believed that Bitcoin would have real scaling solutions. Unfortunately, it turned out that the HK agreement was a farce, and every deadline in the HK agreement was missed, and all the promises made by Blockstream, and their devs were broken.

Maxwell is just a dishonest person, and people have been calling him dishonest on these forums for years. He is a very fitting person to be the Chief whatever officer of Blockstream. Not unlike how it is very fitting to have Lauda, who is an extortionist, to be helping with Core development, running a spell checker in-between his scam and extortion attempts.

Bitcointalk has traditionally been very friendly towards core, and it's supporters. I think it is very interesting to see the reaction to nullc posting in this thread.

3PjXm2XYDKLV5mN3oiKzNTyVvSkqP3ujeq <-- tipping address Advertise here
NLNico
Legendary
*
hacker
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1181


DiceSites.com owner


View Profile WWW
March 26, 2017, 08:16:02 AM
 #36

Roger Ver, open your eyes please.

The reason why the price is going down is because we don't like the BU threat that will give the power over the blocksize to just 5 mining pool operators (or effectively 1 ASIC manufacturer.) I like bitcoin for it's decentralization properties, not because I trust Jihan Wu so much. I will never accept the idiotic idea called "emergent consensus."

Big blocks are great. I definitely want to see safely planned blocksize increase after Segwit. And if it won't be merged in the beginning in Bitcoin Core, I will just support another client, but emergent consensus is still a joke and Segwit is still the obvious way forward.

If you still care about bitcoin, you should reconsider your perspective and look what is best for bitcoin.

Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974
Merit: 1597


GUNBOT Licenses up to 70% OFF - 'GrumpyKitty'.


View Profile WWW
March 26, 2017, 08:22:23 AM
 #37

Who does then Lauda?  Fucking Blockstream and their paid group of takeover artists?  No fucking way.  

Miners still control.  Go run your stupid chain with no miners and have your fucking LN as you wish.  The real Bitcoin is going to continue the way Satoshi wanted it.  

Blockstream tried to take over.  People figured it out.  This isn't really that complicated.
This is bullshit. If anyone is trying to take over the chain, and impose centralized cartel control then it is BTU + Jihan Wu.

-snip-
Full blocks and the high fees and backlog that they create are destroying Bitcoin's comparative advantage and driving people to use alt coins instead.
Wrong. It is you and the scam project called BU (aka BTU) that is driving people away from Bitcoin because of the fear of impending miner cartel control. Nobody in their right mind gives a damn about those scam coins such as ETH and DASH. Your long position in both of those coins (and many others) has created a heavy conflict of interest.

Cry Cry Lauda... I'm not DT anymore... I'm a bad little scammer... Cry Cry
Grow up and get a life. Your post is also factually incorrect about as to who broke the HK agreement first, it was F2Pool.

-snip-
If you still care about bitcoin, you should reconsider your perspective and look what is best for bitcoin.
I highly doubt that more than a minority of the BTU supporters actually care about Bitcoin. They are praising the centralized scam ETH, instamined scam DASH et. al., everyday in their circle-jerk known as r/btc.

.FORTUNE.JACK.
      ▄▄███████▄▄
   ▄████▀▀ ▄ ██████▄
  ████ ▄▄███ ████████
 █████▌▐███▌ ▀▄ ▀█████
███████▄██▀▀▀▀▄████████
█████▀▄▄▄▄█████████████
████▄▄▄▄ █████████████
 ██████▌ ███▀████████
  ███████▄▀▄████████
   ▀█████▀▀███████▀
      ▀▀██████▀▀
         
         █
...FortuneJack.com                                             
...THE BIGGEST BITCOIN GAMBLING SITE
       ▄▄█████████▄▄
    ▄█████████████████▄
  ▄█████████████████████▄
 ▄██
█████████▀███████████▄
██████████▀   ▀██████████
█████████▀       ▀█████████
████████           ████████
████████▄   ▄ ▄   ▄████████
██████████▀   ▀██████████
 ▀██
█████████████████████▀
  ▀██
███████████████████▀
    ▀█████████████████▀
       ▀▀█████████▀▀
#JACKMATE
WIN 1 BTC
▄█████████████████████████▄
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████████▀█████▀██████████
███████▀░░▀░░░░░▀░░▀███████
██████▌░░░░░░░░░░░░░▐██████
██████░░░░██░░░██░░░░██████
█████▌░░░░▀▀░░░▀▀░░░░▐█████
██████▄░░▄▄▄░░░▄▄▄░░▄██████
████████▄▄███████▄▄████████

███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
▀█████████████████████████▀
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 1159


Hire BOUNTYPORTALS>Bounty management goo.gl/pSzJuA


View Profile WWW
March 26, 2017, 08:25:49 AM
 #38

The reason why the price is going down is because we don't like the BU threat that will give the power over the blocksize to just 5 mining pool operators (or effectively 1 ASIC manufacturer.) I like bitcoin for it's decentralization properties, not because I trust Jihan Wu so much. I will never accept the idiotic idea called "emergent consensus."

Big blocks are great. I definitely want to see safely planned blocksize increase after Segwit. And if it won't be merged in the beginning in Bitcoin Core, I will just support another client, but emergent consensus is still a joke and Segwit is still the obvious way forward.
Others have said this before, and I think it is worth saying again. The support that BU is getting is not because the ideas behind BU are so great, it is because of the strong opposition to Core and SW.

I don't believe there are any SW features that are *needed* today/now, but are rather features that might be nice to have in the future. Larger blocks on the other hand is something that Bitcoin has needed for years now. I don't see a reason why SW should get implemented prior to larger blocks, especially after what happened with the HK agreement.

3PjXm2XYDKLV5mN3oiKzNTyVvSkqP3ujeq <-- tipping address Advertise here
Dusty
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 731
Merit: 500


Libertas a calumnia


View Profile WWW
March 26, 2017, 08:28:11 AM
 #39

Quote
And before you try to point fingers and accusing me of helping a side, I am telling you, I don't care who wins, I am tired of your BS and I am going to ditch Bitcoins until things clear.
Well, in my view a more interesting approach would be to buy before a potential split, so that whoever it wins, you win anyway.

Articoli bitcoin: Il portico dipinto
Xising
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 257



View Profile
March 26, 2017, 08:40:33 AM
 #40

Re: Fuck: SegWit, LN, Blockstream, Core, Adam Back, and GMazwell

You are going to end up with $0 if you acquire fake BTU tokens instead of real Bitcoins.

It isn't my opinion. Rather it is the economics and technological facts. You can choose to pursue reality or delusion, but only reality is what you will get.

The BTC price is dropping. Maybe when the block size is increased as suggested by BTU, the price will rise again.


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

⬢⬢

⬢⬢



       ▄▄▄▄
   ▄▄████████▄▄
▄██████████▀▀▀█▀█▄
██ ▀█████▀     ▀██
██▌   ▀▀▀      ███
███▄           ███
████▀         ████
▀████▄     ▄▄████▀
   ▀▀▄▄▄▄████▀▀
       ▀▀▀▀


██████████████████



       ▄▄▄▄
   ▄▄████████▄▄
▄████████████████▄
██████████▀▀  ▐███
██████▀▀  ▄   ████
███▀   ▄█▀   ▐████
████▄▄█▀     █████
▀█████▌ ▄▄▄ ▐████▀
   ▀▀████████▀▀
       ▀▀▀▀


██████████████████



       ▄▄▄▄
   ▄▄████████▄▄
▄███████▀   ▐████▄
████████  ▄███████
██████      ██████
████████  ████████
████████  ████████
▀███████  ███████▀
   ▀▀████████▀▀
       ▀▀▀▀


██████████████████



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


██████████████████
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 36 37 38 »
  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!