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

[traincarswreck]

In 2012 when I bought my bitcoins I was thinking that I'm not going to sell before 10 years. If Core gets its way I might have to sell sooner because Core's vision of Bitcoin is not what I signed up for in 2012.

So assuming that who you are disagreeing with is Core and Core supporters, perhaps at least some of whom got into bitcoin earlier than you, and they signed up for the "vision" that they are upholding...

Why should anyone care that you are coming to a system in which you are leaving because YOU are not getting YOUR way?


And if a lot of people agree with YOU and not core, why should we listen to them if they are not the experienced and knowledgeable devs that have been maintaining the project all along and proposing scientifically based arguments?


The ignorant mass is always going to outnumber the knowledgeable few, what would our constitutions be if we let factions and pure democracy rule? Do you understand the question?

[1715546481]

1715546481

[1715546481]

1715546481

[1715546481]

1715546481

[Hyena]

I don't own any bitcoin yet but the price was starting to look good. Everybody in the coffee shop was trying to convince me to invest in ethereum, but I haven't been studying ethereum, just bitcoin.  Ethereum is too much to digest and bitcoin has continued to surpass expectation.  I'm starting to think that this event is real and bitcoin might suffer but I don't want to miss out on a good deal.  Is this argument as serious has it sounds?  Is bitcoin really dying this time?

Ethereum is not even Bitcoin 2.0 tech. It is just the same old same old block chain with a lot of syntactic sugar added to trick unsuspecting victims into believing that they are investing into BTC 2.0 tech. True Bitcoin 2.0 is the tech that doesn't even need a block chain to have decentralized consensus, has real anonymity that doesn't require mixing and can scale indefinitely. For starters, check out DAGs.

[uchalkql]

This thread looks like the thread where all the smart people hang out.  I've been watching for awhile and learning what I can, but I haven't committed any of my money to anything here yet.  I wanted to get in soon but now I am scared. Is this a good time? Should I download the BU client or the core client? Does it matter who wins?

You should do more search and download the one you want to support.
I would not buy bitcoins now.
And you must think and not just assume it is true.
For example:

"Good ideas don't need censorship."  Roger Ver

I think any rational people agree with this quote. You don't need to be BU supporter or whatever ...

[Hyena]

In 2012 when I bought my bitcoins I was thinking that I'm not going to sell before 10 years. If Core gets its way I might have to sell sooner because Core's vision of Bitcoin is not what I signed up for in 2012.

So assuming that who are are disagreeing with is Core and Core supporters, perhaps at least some of whom got into bitcoin earlier than you, and they signed up for the "vision" that they are upholding...

And why should anyone care that you are coming to a system in which you are leaving because YOU are not getting YOUR way?

Bitcoin Unlimited's path to solve Bitcoin's scaling issues is better than Bitcoin Core's

checkmate, bro

77% economic voters against Core

[chopstick]

BU supporters know nothing about economics but Core thinks high fees, reduced utility and a declining userbase is great.

Okay.

Absolutely and its a founded argument.  The tacit assumption that high fees will kill bitcoin's value is not founded in any accepted economic theory.  Rolling your eyes doesn't change this.

Following this ridiculous logic, BTC will end up with a marketshare of 10% or less while Dash, Monero & Ethereum take over the Crypto space entirely.

That is exactly what will happen without a fork and without a capacity increase.

Rolling your eyes doesn't change this little inconvenient fact either.

[traincarswreck]

Bitcoin Unlimited's path to solve Bitcoin's scaling issues is better than Bitcoin Core's

checkmate, bro

77% economic voters against Core

It's not a democracy, nowhere near.  This is what I am explaining.  Just like the US has the electoral college to protect its citizens from the insecurity of a pure democracy, bitcoin has checks and balances that Satoshi left.  It's quite obvious that there are more ignorant people than educated people, and just as obvious that if you gave the average bitcoiner the steering wheel to the network they would drive it into the ground.

The user doesn't know more than the developers, that would be a silly thing to assert.

[traincarswreck]

Following this ridiculous logic, BTC will end up with a marketshare of 10% or less while Dash, Monero & Ethereum take over the Crypto space entirely.

That is exactly what will happen without a fork and without a capacity increase.

Rolling your eyes doesn't change this little inconvenient fact either.

This is a tacit assumption held by the faction in the community that knows nothing about the history and nature of money or economics in general.  There is no founded argument for what you are saying, and you will notice that you aren't actually citing any such argument.  The whole foundation for science is that it is based on previous discoveries that themselves were defined on observable empirical evidence and such studies that are based on the same.

You and everyone else is asserting that bitcoin's value comes from a belief we need to raise the transaction capacity.  There is no founded argument to support the truth of this.  If you claim there is then I challenge you to produce it or bite your tongue forever.

Dash Monero and Ethereum will NEVER be able to hold the value that bitcoin can secure, they are NOWHERE NEAR as secure and stable in regard to their value propositions. All you can do is point to a future that will never come, and you and others have been saying this about bitcoin for years.

Science proposes FALSIFIABLE conjectures, which means you at LEAST need to put a date to your conjecture, as it stands you have said "blah blah sometime in the future I will be right...."  But the problem is tommorow never comes and so you never have to admit you were wrong.

[jonald_fyookball]

BU supporters know nothing about economics but Core thinks high fees, reduced utility and a declining userbase is great.

Okay.

Absolutely and its a founded argument.  The tacit assumption that high fees will kill bitcoin's value is not founded in any accepted economic theory.  Rolling your eyes doesn't change this.

Following this ridiculous logic, BTC will end up with a marketshare of 10% or less while Dash, Monero & Ethereum take over the Crypto space entirely.

That is exactly what will happen without a fork and without a capacity increase.

Rolling your eyes doesn't change this little inconvenient fact either.

Don't waste your time arguing,man.  if you want to be entertained, go read his 50 page thread where
he tried to seriously convince me that the market is literally God and has perfect knowledge of all future events.

[Killerpotleaf]

Bitcoin Unlimited's path to solve Bitcoin's scaling issues is better than Bitcoin Core's

checkmate, bro

77% economic voters against Core

It's not a democracy, nowhere near.  This is what I am explaining.  Just like the US has the electoral college to protect its citizens from the insecurity of a pure democracy, bitcoin has checks and balances that Satoshi left.  It's quite obvious that there are more ignorant people than educated people, and just as obvious that if you gave the average bitcoiner the steering wheel to the network they would drive it into the ground.

The user doesn't know more than the developers, that would be a silly thing to assert.

spoken like a true bankster
fyi, " average bitcoiners " haven't said a thing so far
except maybe, alex?

[Hyena]

Bitcoin Unlimited's path to solve Bitcoin's scaling issues is better than Bitcoin Core's

checkmate, bro

77% economic voters against Core

It's not a democracy, nowhere near.  This is what I am explaining.  Just like the US has the electoral college to protect its citizens from the insecurity of a pure democracy, bitcoin has checks and balances that Satoshi left.  It's quite obvious that there are more ignorant people than educated people, and just as obvious that if you gave the average bitcoiner the steering wheel to the network they would drive it into the ground.

The user doesn't know more than the developers, that would be a silly thing to assert.

Who was speaking of democracy? Only an idiot thinks democracy is the most effective way of governing herds of sheep who can't think for themselves. I'm speaking of economic voters the ACTUAL STAKEHOLDERS.

If you don't have any bitcoins and if you're not a miner then honestly STFU and GTFO you are no one and have no say in governing this network.

[Killerpotleaf]

Bitcoin Unlimited's path to solve Bitcoin's scaling issues is better than Bitcoin Core's

checkmate, bro

77% economic voters against Core

It's not a democracy, nowhere near.  This is what I am explaining.  Just like the US has the electoral college to protect its citizens from the insecurity of a pure democracy, bitcoin has checks and balances that Satoshi left.  It's quite obvious that there are more ignorant people than educated people, and just as obvious that if you gave the average bitcoiner the steering wheel to the network they would drive it into the ground.

The user doesn't know more than the developers, that would be a silly thing to assert.

Who was speaking of democracy? Only an idiot thinks democracy is the most effective way of governing herds of sheep who can't think for themselves. I'm speaking of economic voters the ACTUAL STAKEHOLDERS.

If you don't have any bitcoins and if you're not a miner then honestly STFU and GTFO you are no one and have no say in governing this network.

yes clearly communism is superior.
democracy SUCKS

[Hyena]

Bitcoin Unlimited's path to solve Bitcoin's scaling issues is better than Bitcoin Core's

checkmate, bro

77% economic voters against Core

It's not a democracy, nowhere near.  This is what I am explaining.  Just like the US has the electoral college to protect its citizens from the insecurity of a pure democracy, bitcoin has checks and balances that Satoshi left.  It's quite obvious that there are more ignorant people than educated people, and just as obvious that if you gave the average bitcoiner the steering wheel to the network they would drive it into the ground.

The user doesn't know more than the developers, that would be a silly thing to assert.

Who was speaking of democracy? Only an idiot thinks democracy is the most effective way of governing herds of sheep who can't think for themselves. I'm speaking of economic voters the ACTUAL STAKEHOLDERS.

If you don't have any bitcoins and if you're not a miner then honestly STFU and GTFO you are no one and have no say in governing this network.

yes clearly communism is superior.
democracy SUCKS

Communism ?! I wonder what a communist Bitcoin economy would look like communists are the worst. They're even worse than nazis. I'm seeing Bitcoin as a capitalist community where the stakeholders should be in charge. Miners are big stakeholders but actual bitcoin holders are also stakeholders. Everyone else, including Blockstream and others are just parasites to the system.

[traincarswreck]

Don't waste your time arguing,man.  if you want to be entertained, go read his 50 page thread where
he tried to seriously convince me that the market is literally God and has perfect knowledge of all future events.

This is you, when confronted with a proper understanding of the nature and purpose of markets, calling that understanding religious. It's religious, it's accepted theory that I explained to you, that you do not yet understand, because you are not familiar with the subject.

spoken like a true bankster
fyi, " average bitcoiners " haven't said a thing so far
except maybe, alex?

I don't know why you are suggesting its bankerspeak for me to point out that if you gave the users the steering wheel to the system they would instantly break it.  Its the foundation for the US constitution and government framework. It's what protects Americans from tyranny AND self harm.

Who was speaking of democracy? Only an idiot thinks democracy is the most effective way of governing herds of sheep who can't think for themselves. I'm speaking of economic voters the ACTUAL STAKEHOLDERS.

If you don't have any bitcoins and if you're not a miner then honestly STFU and GTFO you are no one and have no say in governing this network.

Your argument equates to pure democracy, we don't necessarily at all want the stakeholders to vote for the direction of bitcoin, you want it to be decided by the most knowledge and intelligent participants. It's my exact point.

And its the same reasoning as is for the reason that the American system is not a pure democracy:
https://steemit.com/politics/@jokerpravis/why-democracy-isn-t-ideal

Here is the source writing/explanation by Madision
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed10.asp

yes clearly communism is superior.
democracy SUCKS

Pure democracy equates to communism, and so does BU, which is the belief that you must overthrow the elite in order to temporarily replace the elite in until the system can be "truly democratized".  But pure democracy/communism just ends up in rights and freedom not being upheld while simultaneously installing a dictatorship:

https://medium.com/@rextar4444/the-absurdity-of-communism-and-hard-forking-bitcoin-to-coup-core-4486aa9191c8#.vm8aops6s

Communism

It would be helpful for the readers to share a common understanding of communism and exactly why it was popular with some populations (and perhaps why it wasn’t in some):

com·mu·nism
 ˈkämyəˌnizəm/
 noun
 noun: communism; noun: Communism; plural noun: Communisms
a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.

Communism is the idea that that the people might rise up in revolt against their rulers and distribute the otherwise concentrated wealth (bounty) among themselves. It’s not hard to see how such an idea would spread among an impoverished class of (uneducated) people or how such an idea could easily spread beyond national borders (although on the other hand it probably wouldn’t be very well received by patriotic nations).

Marx’s view was that capitalism was the great evil that stole the ability to own the means of production from the common person. The only cure was for the people (the proletariat) to rise up and usurp the rulers (the bourgeois). The intermediate step, known as the “dictatorship of the proletariat”, was the “temporary” de facto government that would lead the people to the new found socialist freedom:

In between capitalism and communism there is the dictatorship of the proletariat, a democratic state where the whole of the public authority is elected and recallable under the basis of universal suffrage;[30]

Dictatorship of the proletariat-In Marxist sociopolitical thought, the dictatorship of the proletariat refers to a state in which the proletariat, or the working class, has control of political power.

Lenin defines dictatorship from his Marxist view:

….Dictatorship does not necessarily mean the abolition of democracy for the class that exercises the dictatorship over other classes; but it does mean the abolition of democracy (or very material restriction, which is also a form of abolition) for the class over which, or against which, the dictatorship is exercised.
 — Vladimir Lenin[20][21] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletariat

But the idea that such a de facto and temporary government might properly serve the people has been oft criticized. Here a quote by John Nash spoils our conclusion, but without the context that will be given later, following the logical argument for such reasoning as to the absurdity of Marxism as a means to a rational ends:

…in the end the “dictatorship of the proletariat” seemed to become rather exposed as simply the dictatorship of the regime.

[Killerpotleaf]

he must be a paid troll..

[traincarswreck]

Communism ?! I wonder what a communist Bitcoin economy would look like communists are the worst. They're even worse than nazis. I'm seeing Bitcoin as a capitalist community where the stakeholders should be in charge. Miners are big stakeholders but actual bitcoin holders are also stakeholders. Everyone else, including Blockstream and others are just parasites to the system.

What you are arguing for is perfectly equatable to communism and its a terrible idea that leads to a terrible end. That status quo in which the developers can protect bitcoin from tyranny of the majority (ie the irrational uneducated users) is necessary to protect the users and stakeholders from destroying the project.

[OneUnderBridge]

he must be a paid troll..

Do they really pay trolls? Or, is that a myth? What is the pay rate and where do we apply? I don't own any bitcoin yet but working as a troll might be a safe way to gain entry.

[jonald_fyookball]

he must be a paid troll..

either that or just an attention seeking nut.  time to hit the ignore button 

[traincarswreck]

he must be a paid troll..

Readers will notice something about the difference between me and you.  I make reasoned arguments and address others points.  And more importantly very often I cite my sources.  I don't ever see you citing founded arguments or accepted theory.  

The debate and the tone of it is wholly different when the Ver brigade does not control the moderation and types of participants that are allowed.

I will constantly hold you to citing your claims and giving REASONED and founded arguments.

[franky1]

Who was speaking of democracy? Only an idiot thinks democracy is the most effective way of governing herds of sheep who can't think for themselves. I'm speaking of economic voters the ACTUAL STAKEHOLDERS.

If you don't have any bitcoins and if you're not a miner then honestly STFU and GTFO you are no one and have no say in governing this network.

democracy is about anyone having the power to vote.
bitcoin is about everyone running a node having a say. that includes merchants and pools
it costs nothing to run a node. you are not asked to pay to be a member/voter/VIP

core want dictatorship with the fake pretence of democracy...

turning bitcoin into a quasi dictatorship with a gesture of democracy... but in reality its a meritocracy

dont let core turn bitcoin into a centralised TIER network

bitcoin works better as a diverse decentralised per network

[uchalkql]

he must be a paid troll..

yes. He creates a lot of noise on the threads with nonsense and things completely unrelated with OP subject.
And this should be a good reason to ban him.
Meanwhile we should do like jonald and put him on ignore list.
He cares so much about number of comments, then maybe he is trying to reach 1000.