1. btc 2018 is not the same rules as bitcoin 2016.. neither is bitcoin cash. hens 2 different directions from the 2016 version. hense why gmax called it a bilateral split. again for emphasis. gmax named it such. not me. again lets get it right. the word bilateral split begun by gmax's utility of the word. it is not a word i invented or started using. the reason i laugh so much is that you want to deny it occuring yet it was the devs that caused it, named it, mandated it.. not me. i simply informed people of the devs actions. if you have an issue of the use of bilateral splits then take that up with those you follow.
Franky1 is a consistent shill and over the top liar who abusively exploits many people's lack of experience with technical matters to make claims which are flat on their face untrue.
1. can bitcoin version0.1.x->0.11.x verify signatures of SEGWIT. - NOPE (thus the 2016-2017 change)
2. bitcoin nodes are suppose to fully verify full block and full transaction data. but it wont
3. will a bitcoin node version 0.1.x->0.11.x store FULL BLOCK DATA of all block information of 2017-2019 - NOPE
4. old nodes are given a stripped version that lacks crucial things to be able to verify a transaction was signed properly
5. can bitcoin version0.1.x->0.11.x relay ALL transaction types of bitcoin - NOPE
because bitcoin <=2016 and bitcoin 2017 => are different
as for trying to say that bitcoin 0.18 is the same as 0.8.x or bitcoin0.1.x ... but then go about explaining that lots of changes are needed to just make 0.1.x work. shows that bitcoin has changed.
saying that the code needs to be changed to work means its not the same thing.
and also you have not been honest about how many likes of code are needed.
its involving using an entirely different database structure. so is not a simple change a variable thing.
an your foolish attempt to hide the changes to bitcoin by saying about 'address formats are just UI based' is you misleading
segwit based addresses are technically at code level and inside blockdata level different than legacy
the way addresses are treated are different. both in how they are verified (using a different txid. different signature methods and even where in a transaction the signature sits within block data
heck bitcoin 2009-2016 had no possible way to make blocks over 1mb.. yet 2017-2019 blocks are over 1mb
so even looking just at the size of blocks shows there are changes done
but good luck with your hiding the facts
anyone can take a look at the raw data(not UI representation) of a legacy tx and rawdata(not UI representation) of a segwit tx and see there is major differences
but hey gmaxwell does not like being called out on his lies so bans his opposition. just like a bilateral fork banning opposition that dont like his and his buddies code ideas
consensus suppose to be where no upgrades can be done unless high majority consent to it
core didnt get high majority so thy banned the opposition to get a fake majority by not counting the opposition
EG
imagine
hilary 50% trump %50
trump asks for a recount but to only count the trump ballots
suddenly election results show 100% trump
oh and this quote
Bitcoin rejects Bcash blocks (because, among other reasons, the first bcash block warped down the difficulty for their forktime 'instamine') which is what makes it a hardfork, and Bcash rejects Bitcoin blocks (because they didn't contain the instamine) which makes the hardfork bilateral.
actually core nodes were banning non core nodes HOURS before cash nodes even made a block with a different difficulty..
blockchain data shows that bitcoin cash did not even make a block until hours later. because they were banned from the core network
but atleast thank you for admitting there was a bilateral split AND a hard fork. you deserve another 50 merit for atleast clearing that matter up.. i hope windfury atleast acknowledges that too. (he your number one fan gmax)
(50 merit will be added to gmax in a week after the 30 day waiting period expires)
