@infofront,
Please do not take this response as disrespectful. I appreciate you and respect you as a person. I am going to frankly express my displeasure at the apparent laziness of your thought processes. I know you to be a very smart and articulate person. So I am remiss to understand how you could make the logic errors below. I can only assume it is because you are simply busy and have not been able to think about this issue intensely as I have. The diligent turtle wins the race against the hasty hare.
Note if you were able to find some hole in my reasoning, I would be grateful. So please do not take this as hubris. I am just flabberghast that this issue seems to be so difficult for most people to digest coherently.
We differ when we get to opportunity cost. As in, I don't think it's likely that there is one.
BTC can't be dumped for TRB because TRB will be blacklisted from any and every legitimate exchange and OTC broker. The few shady Chinese exchanges that may list it won't have any liquidity. Similarly, the Etherum DAO "attacker" couldn't spend his ETH anywhere. Hell, CSW sued a few people around the twitterverse and several of the largest exchanges delisted BSV. How much worse shape will TRB be in when the authorities declare segwit booty coins to all be considered stolen property?
Also, it would be much too risky, legally. People would go to jail or get killed for taking the booty. With the booty stolen, major exchanges would lose money, banks would lose money, oligarchs would lose money, nation states would lose money. Those people are the elite, and they would absolutely crush any miners who stole from them.
Besides all of that, it would be a PR nightmare. No one would trust the miners and TRB chain anymore. If the miners could collaborate to steal the segwit booty, they could also collaborate to start double spending on it at any point.
Here is my opinion. You are free to have your own opinion. And one of us will be correct. I dare you to store your
BTC in SegWit addresses that begin with a
3 if you have conviction about your opinion. Put your money where your mouth is, I certainly am.
I'm keeping all my BTC in legacy addresses. I've advised others to do the same. However, I'd estimate there's only something like a 10-15% chance that the booty will ever be taken.
As I have stated in private (and I believe also public?) communications,
I don’t have absolute confidence about the timing. Craig Wright
has ostensibly promised to initiate the attack at halving on May 2020 (although Craig is apparently obscuring the restoration of Satoshi’s immutable Bitcoin as something benefiting BSV which is not immutable, because ostensibly Craig’s role is to scam everyone, including everyone investing in BSV). And given a $100 – 400 billion booty (depending on
BTC price in May 2020 and whether the current 6 million
BTC in SegWit addresses increases), I posit they could (as @jbreher
alluded to when he mentioned Ayre’s SQR is a customer of at least Samsung) afford to increase their extant 3% of the network hashrate (which perhaps is already sufficient to initiate the attack since miners will be incentivized in snowball effect to switch from Core to donations taking) possibly monopolizing (i.e. buy all of) the ASIC production for SHA256 for a considerable period of time (to make it sure they have enough monopoly on
spare hashrate to annihilate Core … a detailed discussion of the mechanics is omitted for the time being so as to keep this discussion concise).
Yet I do have nearly absolute confidence about the SegWit donations taking coming to fruition eventually because the (eventually $trillions if not taken soon) booty removes the Nash equilibrium because until it is taken nobody can be sure whether their spends will not be rolled back, i.e. that the miners could begin the restoration “attack” at any time and nobody can know when (the initial stage of the donations taking will be surreptitious so the planners can get their free air-dropped Core shitcoins separated and loaded onto to exchanges for dumping to Tether and for bankrupting the exchanges which hodl in SegWit addresses).
And AFAICS, the May 2020 halving is the ideal/optimum confluence of timing for all the reasons I have already stated in this thread and the other threads which are cited in this thread.
So I guesstimate the odds of the attack at the May 2020 halving at no less than 20 – 33% (only low because I lack time to investigate and because Craig is not the most reliable person around) and I’m leaning higher than that, although I don’t have enough time to research and keep tabs on Craig and his group. If I really wanted more conviction on the timing and I had a lot at stake, I could investigate more, but my opportunity cost is too great. I have other important things to do.
My speculative narrative tying this into posited global-elite “666” plans for a Facebook’s Libra, is that Craig is purposefully appearing to be a loon and also a scammer. This is necessary in my narrative to turn the public towards Libra and away from decentralized cryptocurrency from 2020 forward after the SegWit restoration of Bitcoin
potentially decimates the cryptocosm for some years.
I have a strong opinion which will seem quite judgmental. Unfortunately like most people you are apparently easily fooled by manipulated optics and not able to drill down to fundamental generative essence economics and game theory. Most people are prone to a delusion that reality is that which is openly visible. It’s some sort of carryover from our evolution in our ancestral environment. We are still very much herding animals, so easy to be fooled like sheep.
Essence of GeniusOr you're just too emotionally and/or egotistically (as your link above would imply) invested in your narrative to see or acknowledge other possibilities.
It’s not egotistical to attempt to objectively identify what distinguishes genius. I’m not claiming I’m genius or significantly so. I know my limitations.
Emotional? My use of terms such as “fucktard” is because I am so exasperated that sheepeople are unable to assimilate information. And that sheepeople are so easily fooled because they do not reason coherently. The following linked blog post explains the taxonomy of mental errors that most people make and which you are also (apparently?) making here in this post of yours:
http://trilema.com/2018/how-to-piss-me-the-fuck-off-a-guide/For example, the inkblot of assigning ego to my linked attempt to understand what distinguishes genius. Or your mislabeling as “emotion” that which is actually exasperation+exhaustion of explaining the same points over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over over and over and over and over and over again (and just balancing the rhetoric against those who started the discussion by referring to me as a “nutjob”).
Btw, I should not even bother writing here, but I do it because I care and because when I am proven correct later, it will raise my status amongst those who notice and I will hopefully get more respect and cooperation as a result, at least from those awake enough to realize/discriminate. Also because the cryptocosm has been good to me, and thus I have a duty to return something back to the community. This is my Weberian cultural values, being that I am a Hajnal line Western Christian. Also given I was raised in the South, I have particular sense of allegiance to honorable virtues. Also because my ancestor was
Isaac Shelby.
Whenever someone says that something is 100% certain to happen, that sends up a huge, red flag. When it's something like the segwit booty being claimed by miners, there are two many moving parts and variables, some known and some unknown, to draw a certain conclusion.
Some things are actually 99.9% certain. For example it is 99.9% certain that all of us will die. So it’s another inkblot to start off with a premise that anyone who claims high degree of certitude or conviction is necessarily incorrect. It’s as if you’re trying to apply an aphorism that isn’t always true. Your “red flag” indicator is not an 100% automatic implication of falsehood or even low likelihood (low likelihood for a large sample of such tests yes, but each test has the small potential to have a high variance). You must apply a lot of effort to determine if your red flag test represents a valid case or not. Lazy aphorisms will not suffice.
A more pertinent example here and addressing your strawman of “moving parts” would be our recent private discussion of the future politics in the USA. While there are many moving parts, we can conclude with near certainty that because of inertia that can’t be undone or compensated for quickly enough, the U.S.A. will trend towards the Millennials’ philosophical preferences (formed in their youth) after the Silent Generation is all dead and the Millennials have matured enough to vote en masse circa 2032.
Further to the strawman of “moving parts”, our human bodies are remarkably complex, yet I can predict that I will not fall down the stairs tonight when I descend to the dinner table. Entropy does not work the way you are postulating. Nature is amazingly complex, yet I can be fairly certain that the Sun will rise tomorrow and that there will be oxygen in the bedroom when I open the entrance door.
Basically what you’re admitting is that you’re blinded by complexity you can’t/haven’t reasoned about/through, thus you can’t/don’t see any coherent, absolutely convincing reasoning on the issue. I.e. you see only too many moving parts wherein a smarter or more diligently studious person may assimilate a pattern+model. Thus you apparently default back to (manipulated/politicized) optics as your basis for what will happen, which is a very aggravating mental error that most people make. If sheepeople can’t understand something, they substitute shortcuts to console themselves.
Sheepeople are herded animals. When they can’t make holistic sense something directly, they look at the arses of the other sheepeople or
any other mystical sign (which is why
the masses are so dangerous). IOW, they grasp at strings as you have ostensibly done by
“you can not possibly be correct, because (too complex and) you are too certain of our convictions, therefore it must be ego and emotion clouding your reasoning.”That is not logic. That is aliasing error, witch craft or voodoo. If you’ve seen other idiots slobbering nonsense with “conviction” in this world, please don’t presume I’m as sloppy in my analysis as they are. You must actually dissect my arguments and reasoning, which so far I have not seen you do to any extensive level.
Regarding exchanges, please re-read what I
wrote in an earlier post in this thread. Also re-read my points there about the uber elite trade on OTC which will never blacklist anything that can earn a matchmaker lucrative commissions. The powers-that-be control the exchanges. These “bucket shops” are a dog and pony circus they setup to fool you. It’s analogous to a facade of a building on a Hollywood set.
Indeed (the “PR nightmare”) creating the illusion that Bitcoin died is part of the timing of bringing their 666 Facebook Libra to prominence. I explained that in more detail above. Then later the powers-that-be (i.e. the uber wealthy who will control most of the
BTC after the minions are kicked off by the donations taking and the rising transaction fees) bring back the real Bitcoin which never died and start backing Libra with it.
Haven’t you ever wondered why Bitcoin recieved so much airtime in the Zionist controlled mass media? Facebook’s Libra
is most definitely Zionists controlled.
The entire point is to fool everyone. Because goyim sheepeople are so easy to fool. It’s akin to taking candy from babies.
Your delusion about the law is especially unremarkable:
“Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws”
The uber wealthy are above the law. The law is for enslaving sheepeople. My gosh you folks live in some fantasy which does not exist. Please try to come back in touch with reality.
Virtually no one with any power has a significant amount of bitcoin.
Apologies but I must be frank and state that’s presumptuous nonsense that fails to consider the known facts of Bitcoin and our physical universe.
Power relative to Bitcoin or power in the world-at-large? The latter is the only claim that could possibly have any chance of being correct, and it would be irrelevant to our discussion. It’s only the economic majority of Bitcoin that matters w.r.t. to a hard fork war (i.e. when the miners start taking the generous, noble, appreciated “please-protect-Bitcoin’s-security-and-Nash-equilibrium” donations).
Where did you get this idea? We have for example the
trilema.com dude with at least 500,000
BTC. We have Ayre with 3% of the Bitcoin network hashrate. We have the Winklevoss twins. We have countries such as Bulgaria and Russia reportedly accumulating large stakes.
Also how would you know who controls the
18 million BTC already minted?
Most importantly there is unequivocal proof that you’re both incorrect and not very astute on this point. The power-law distribution of wealth (and of any fungible resource) in an inviolable phenomenon of nature. Someone would have to be very, very dumb to assume the power-law distribution does not apply to Bitcoin. I assume you’re not dumb, so this is probably just your failing to assimilate all the known factors.
Perhaps what you meant to imply is that no one powerful enough relative to the world-at-large, but that would be irrelevant to a fork war which only requires the decision of the economic majority of Bitcoin, not necessarily the powerful that control the world. Nevertheless $100 – 400 billion of booty (and probably growing) is probably significant enough to powerful in the realm of the world-at-large.
Additionally there’s no law which prevents miners from obeying the immutable protocol. Where did you dream up this illegality nonsense? Cryptocurrency is not banking. There are no consumer protection laws. It is really amazing to me that you would make such a mistake in your thought process.
You're thinking like a computer scientist and not like a bureaucrat.
No I am actually saying AFAIK there is no law (nor jurisprudence) on the books for example in the U.S.A. that could be applied against miners. Miners mine which ever proof-of-work blockchain and fork they want to mine. It’s a free market activity. Some miners switch blockchains often according to where they compute they can earn the most return-on-investment. If they choose to mine Satoshi’s protocol, that is not illegal. If fools donate their
BTC to
“anyone can spend” incentivizing the miners to mine on Satoshi’s protocol to restore the Nash equilibrium and thus (restoring) the security of the longest chain, then AFAICS the miners are doing a perfectly legal and absolutely honorable action.
What do idiots deserve when they have willingly misconfigured their clients and spend their
BTC to UTXO which have signatures which are unrecognizable in the Satoshi protocol. It will be hilarious if anyone tries to take a miner to court (assuming they can even identify any miners given that proof-of-work enables miners to be anonymous). I believe any reasonable judge will throw such a nonsense case out of court for lack of grounds for case.
The Bitcoin protocol makes no legal guarantees about which “soft fork” the miners will follow. Only idiots who have no training in law, think that Core’s political deceptions bind legal obligations to miners.
Even common law would be enough to prosecute miners for defrauding thousands of people.
Please cite such jurisprudence? Miners are not defrauding anyone. Everyone with SegWit
3 addresses will still have their tokens in the Core protocol, after it hard forks off from the Satoshi protocol at that juncture. Why should miners be obligated to give them Satoshi protocol tokens which the miners expend hashrate and risk to obtain, at the juncture when the Satoshi miners restore Bitcoin’s immutability and Nash equilibrium by forcing the Core scam to fork (and fuck) off?
Core is the one who deceived the users implying that a “soft fork” with signaling is a guaranteed thing. No. If Core wanted to prevent such a booty, power vacuum and hole in the Nash equilibrium from accruing, they could have instead hardforked off as BCH and BSV did, but of course Core preferred a political power vacuum, because they know damn well that a hardfork would have rendered Core as shitcoins because everyone sells the free airdrop from hard forks. Also because this entire “anyone can spend” and Core political “soft fork” was premeditated before Bitcoin was even launched. Go read what Satoshi wrote. He knew damn well what he enabled. The global elite have had this masterfully planned out. Do you not realize there are human beings on this earth with IQ above 200. Do you not understand that these individuals can reason out complexity that even you and I would have great difficulty fathoming in advance.
The court will look at the facts and realize that the miners have done nothing illegal and that users had freewill. Users can store in Legacy
1 addresses if they want to retain their Satoshi protocol tokens and receive a free airdrop of Core tokens at the hardfork off.
Do you really believe this nonsense you are spewing? I can’t even believe this was written by the same guy I have been communicating with lately. I had developed a lot of respect for you. I frankly believe you are just extremely naive about this issue. I have been studying this and thinking about it for year(s).
My father was a high powered attorney (was West Coast Division Head Attorney for Exxon in the 1980s and early 1990s, before moving on to
T.H.U.M.S.) so I have some familiarity with concepts of law and jurisprudence (but not expert). I also ran a business before. I am not your typical young computer science nerd. I have experience in accounting, legal issues, and wide range of disciplines. Again I do not claim to be an expert in law, yet the above is really just common sense.
That is also helps to discredit decentralized cryptocurrency so as to aid the acceptance and preference for the lack of permissionlessness in FacebooK’s Libra. Burning the fingertips of crypto fools up to their armpits is how to make the public view the lack of permissionlessness in Facebook Libra as an advantage over that “scam” of decentralized cryptocurrency which preceded Libra.
Also I had already explained in great detail how the miners who partake will be able to cash out of their free air-drop of Core shitcoins (to altcoins, fiat, etc) using Tether in a way that exchanges will be incapable of blacklisting. Go back to the Long-term advance notice thread and also find the posts I made on Steemit about that specific point.
If the miners could collaborate to steal the segwit booty, they could also collaborate to start double spending on it at any point.
Damnit I am so tired of reading this same nonsense point repeated after I have refuted it so many times. Why can’t you guys assimilate and remember what I write?
The Schelling point is only for maintaining the immutability of Satoshi’s protocol. There is no Schelling point around double-spending. Think it out. I explained this in great detail in the past and I am not going to repeat it all again or go digging to find the post where I did spoon fed the detailed logic. This is exhausting. I am not going to hold your hand every time you cross the street without looking both directions. Go lose your
BTC in SegWit addresses. Lol.
Cripes would you sheepeople at least learn something about game theory before slobbering more nonsense.
The Schelling point has shifted to segwit. The fact that the Schelling point was 1mb two years ago is becoming less and less relevant. The Schelling point of money used to be seashells. These things change, and in the bitcoin world they change at incredible speed.
I expended great effort to explain in my prior post that
political Schelling points are
power vacuums. It seems as if that statement flew right over your head? Do you understand what a power vacuum means in that context and why it is an important point that refutes you?
You are conflating different concepts as if you have no holistic conceptualization of the interaction of power vacuums, stability of Schelling points, political deception, unforgeable costliness, application of law, etc.. Let’s see how to unravel this…
The transition from seashells to another form of money was not driven and sustained by a political decision that erected a power vacuum. It was driven by fundamental economics. Even when King Henry declared tally sticks to be legal tender, this was not (only) a political decision but rather sustained by a fundamental power that could not be effectively challenged as the King possessed the power to stably capture the power vacuum of governance for an extended epoch. I.e. there was no power vacuum causing instability in CONFIDENCE and STABILITY of the legal tender.
Schelling points are stable only if they involve a fundamental economics raison d'être, because a power vacuum is always unstable until a fundamental economic power captures it. The definition of power
VACUUM means a lack of stable capture of the power. A “soft fork” that creates a booty is an intentional creation of a power VACUUM, that must be vacated eventually. Don’t repeat the same dumb arguments I already refuted many times over and over and over again, such as arguing that the Satoshi protocol would be hard forking away from the SegWit protocol. Nonsense. The Legacy address hodlers get tokens in both protocols. The SegWit address bagholders get only Core shitcoins. That is proof that Core is hard forking away, not vice versa.
The essence of politics is competition over who will capture the power vacuum.
Since Core promulgated a (quite deceptive) political Schelling point which is a power vacuum that can only be fully captured by restoring the Nash equilibrium of taking the $100+ billion SegWit booty, then we know without any doubt whatsoever that Core is not stable Schelling point.
Deceptive because if Core had instead hardforked then the free market would have already decided and no booty and no loss of Nash equilibrium would have been possible. Core created the problem because they know if they hardforked off, they would have ended up as a shitcoin like BCH and BSV (which is where Core will end up when it is forced to fork off by the booty taking).
No, things don’t change with respect to Bitcoin otherwise it would have no value. If Bitcoin could change like the political wind, who the fuck would want to hodl the shit. Immutability is absolutely essential. It seems you really do not understand Nick Szabo’s
unforgeable costliness and PlanB’s model of Bitcoin’s value.
The only thing that changed is that Core erected an ephemeral political power vacuum by fooling a lot of people. But Bitcoin itself never changed. This will become evident probably on May 2020.
If you think I am just making claims without sufficient unequivocal proof, then you apparently are sufficiently ignorant of the generative
essence of politics. I cited Eric Raymond’s blog. The guy has north of a 152 IQ and there was a comment on that blog about power vacuums from a guy who has a ~165 IQ. Do you really think you’re in their league? Maybe you should take some time to study and reflect deeply on this? It seems to me you really haven’t thought through what a power vacuum is in this context. What a Nash equilibrium means. What a stable Schelling point is based on and requires. Etc.
Furthermore, you can't demonstrate conclusively that we're not at a Nash equilibrium currently. The linchpin of your entire theory is based on pure speculation that powerful elites will flood into TRB.
I'll publicly state that this is quite possible, but far from a certainty.
Of course I can demonstrate conclusively there is no Nash equilibrium other than the donations taking event. There is a $100+ billion (probably $400 billion by May 2020) booty for taking which (if even only a small fraction is recovered) can fund monopolizing (i.e. purchasing) all SHA256 ASIC production for multiple years. How will anyone compete for mining Core if they can’t get enough of the latest ASICs? How much more demonstration do you need? You going to wait until the
overwhelming power of fundamental economic fact is demonstrated with the actual donations taking to then realize it was an undeniable fact?
You guys have attempted to argue that the donations taking Bitcoin would have no value. But I have become much more convicted with the announcement of Facebook Libra, because it is entirely obvious to me now that backing Libra with Bitcoin after the strong dollar vortex guarantees that Bitcoin will have $trillions in market cap valuation. And only an immutable Bitcoin will ever be accepted as a reserve asset. Who would accept a global reserve asset that was controlled by programmers mostly from the USA? Moreover who would hold or trust a reserve asset which can be “soft forked” by the manipulation of politics? Come on man.
I absolutely can’t fathom logically where your skepticism originates (other than I as I stated, you seemed bewildered so you apparently point at shadows/aphorisms and other forms aliasing error). You’ve made no statement that makes any sense to me whatsoever. Which is strange because I normally find you to be very astute and well reasoned.
Edit: After thinking about it some more, I'm willing to concede that
if the right elites get involved, the other problems could disappear.
I began thinking about the 2008 housing crisis in the US, and how the elites committed fraud, crashed the economy, took millions of homes from people, and laughed all the way to the bank.
And no one went to jail. In fact, the government gave the banks more money, and executive bonuses hit new records. This seems to be an analogous situation to the segwit booty theft.
You added this after I wrote the portion of my reply above.
How many examples of the global elite, Zionists banksters cleverly raping the sheepeople do you need?
And you don’t find Facebook Libra the least bit suspicious? What’s going on with that? Created by the CIA, etc..
I documented all of that already.
https://www.corbettreport.com/siliconvalley/https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3017716/facebooks-libra-forcing-china-step-plans-its-ownLibra + Bitcoin is precisely how they could plausibly get the monetary reset that Martin Armstrong knows is coming but (he) can’t yet fathom how they will accomplish it:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/southeast_asia/thailand-the-new-safe-haven/Armstrong has a lot of these sort of nuggets:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/goldman-sachs-control-the-sec/Their plan is already in plain view for those with powers of discernment.
Disclaimer: nothing in this post (and any of my writings) is to be construed as legal or investing advice. Readers please consult your own professional adviser.
Is that it? That's your debate? That didn't answer the question. But what rational exchange would give your apocalypse-coin, the chain which miners can STEAL Segwit outputs, the BTC ticker?
You do not reason, that my rebuttal implies also that the assignment of a ticker symbol and other forms of politicized optics is irrelevant.
Hundreds? Can you name some of them? I believe there's none.
I won’t allow you to waste my time with your apparent ignorance of the s/w industry. Believe whatever you want to believe.
Somehow China, Russia, USA, Japan can send satellites into outer-space but you think only a few guys on this planet can write software and incorporate cryptography.
Craig Wright dont control bitcoin. He controls bitcoin SV, which is a fork of bitcoin cash.
I have not based my stance on any claim that Craig controls Bitcoin at this time. When the donations taking begins, the snowball effect will likely send most miners fleeing to get their share of the donations. I already detailed the posited mechanics and economics in
prior comments on my blog and other forum thread, which includes how Craig+Arye’s SQR (boosted by a cool $billion or so extracted from the initial attack such as the massive short position they will have, etc) can in theory possibly crater the Core BitcOn hashrate after running the price skyhigh right at the halving thus bankrupting miners who don’t mine for donations taking. I am not going to spoon feed every 110 IQ bunny rabbit that comes along here and repeats the same nonsense which I already refuted before.
Whatever he tries to attempt, I dont believe miners will follow him.
What does your beliefs have to do with anything? What is your IQ maybe 110? Where are your facts and relevant economic and game theory arguments?
They didnt follow the bitcoin cash fork in the first place, and even the ones who followed it, didnt follow to the SV fork after that.
Yet Craig crashed the Bitcoin price and presumably made a fortune shorting.
Bitmain, which is one of the biggest, stayed with bitcoin and bitcoin cash. There is only one company mining bitcoin SV, which is controlled by Craig Wright.
Bitcoin the company which had to abandon its ICO and appears to be in dire financial straits, thus likely very desperate when Craig crashes the hashrate. Jihan Wu was more than once in Israel presumably meeting with his Zionist masters.
Also Bitcoin has very wealthy customers. You have no idea who they are and what their intentions and plans are.
Bitcoin miners had signalled Segwit after the bitcoin cash fork,
The Zionists love how stupid goyim are. Signaling. Bwahaha.
“But you can’t take my BTC because miners signaled, huhuhu, all my BTC is gone poof, but you signaled, huhuhu”. Fucking sheepeople retards deserve exactly what they going to get.
[…] and even if Segwit had some problems, the network recognizes its address formats.
Only the Core protocol “soft fork” does.
Segwit addresses didnt have retrievable private keys in 0.15
That has nothing to do with what we are discussing. The fact that you do not realize this, is indicative that you do not know what you are doing.
, but now they have, so what do we have here? We have a sophisticated attempt at FUD, to create panic and make people exchange their bitcoins for fiat money.
There’s no FUD. And I didn't advocate anyone selling
BTC just because of this. I advocated hodling in Legacy addresses.
If such "donations mechanism" exists, miners will not touch it, because it would cause a desynch in the network and, consequently, a hard fork.
Indeed. But you are not considering all the factors that the miners will be faced with after Core is forced to hard fuck off. Such as a cratering price which means a cratering income for miners because the difficulty will not adjust downward for some weeks or perhaps months. It is going to be absolute devastation for Core miners. You fool.
Also the price would go down due to the FUD created by such action, and the so-called billions of dollars of the "Segwit booty" would value only some millions. Its just a matter of game theory: miners would shoot at their own feet if they mess with the address structure. They would kill their own industry.
The entire point is to crash the price dimwit. Craig will have already cashed via shorting on the exchanges, and dumping his preloaded Core airdrop shitcoins to Tether or alts.
You have no fucking clue what you are writing about.
Craig will be able to extract perhaps $billion immediately and the long-term plan is probably in the $100s of billions. The legacy Bitcoin will eventually recover in price.
