Questions for Greg Maxwell

[PepeLapiu]

Why would I have commented

You can't answer the 3 questions in OP because doing so would expose you as the coretard liar that you are. I'd like you to answer those questions in your own words.

What wasn't addressed in this thread was your continual misrepresentation of classical timelocks.

The title of the tread is "Questions for Greg Maxwell". You refuse to answer any of the questions and you think you can decide on what was not addressed? You just want to change the subject to something else so that you don't have to answer the actual questions.

And honest party would acknowledge the explication and the limitations of their proposal in that situation-- but strangely you continue to just lie and gaslight about it.

Answer the 3 questions in OP, and I will answer any follow up question you may have. You don't get to ignore the questions, change the subject, and demand answers to your own questions.

All you're doing is making 110 look worse by making it clear that its proponents are not prepared to deal honestly with its downsides, so perhaps I should just follow the old advice of never interrupting an enemy while he's making a mistake.

Everyone can clearly see you are avoiding the 3 questions in OP directed at you. And desperately trying to change the subject.

[DaveF]

....I should just follow the old advice of never interrupting an enemy while he's making a mistake.

I would go with "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience,"

Remember you are dealing with a cult member.

When you think about it Pepe is very similar to one the people who moved to Jonestown. They left California to move to Guyana to follow their leader. Pepe left Canada and moved to El Salvador to follow Luke / Ocean. They believed Jim Jones spoke for god, Pepe believes Luke speaks for satoshi.

Pepe looks to be just a bitter person because he tried to get rich with the get rich quick magical internet money and didn't. Now he is following the person telling him it's not his fault it's all the other peoples fault and he knows how to fix it. Just like the Jonestown people who could not hack it in society. Some did have mental / drug issues but looking at the group most just wanted everything for free with no or minimal work.

Same concept, different time. Except for the fact that Jim Jones had 100s and 100s of followers and Luke has like a dozen. OTOH Jim Jones was charismatic.

It's 90 days +/- a few before the 110 nodes start rejecting blocks. After that we get to see what the new scam is going to be.

Heck at this point even Paul's eCash has more support then 110. And that is saying a lot. But, if we can actually sell the lukecoin fork and the eCash fork this summer for more BTC or fiat it's not the worst.

-Dave

[PepeLapiu]

....I should just follow the old advice of never interrupting an enemy while he's making a mistake.

I would go with "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience,"

Remember you are dealing with a cult member.

40% of the UTXO set is spam dust that has nothing to do with bitcoin as money.
50% of current block content is spam bloat that has nothing to do with bitcoin as money.
85% of Taproot outputs are spam dust UTXOs that have nothing to do with bitcoin as money.
Spam pools are now running spamware like LibreRelay and Slipstream intended to bypass the nodes policy, which is the only part of bitcoin still decentralized.

All the while core is rejecting spam filters, blowing up existing filters, and referring to spam as "use cases we have today".

There is obviously a very bad cancer growing in bitcoin. And all you can do is point to those who talk about the problem and do something about it, and you just say they are "cult members"?

Give your fucking head a shake, buddy.

You are clearly trying to not see the obvious problem here. Bad actor or just dumb?

What I think is that you are a spammer, Dave. What's your shitcoin? Runes? Ordinals? BRC tokens? What kind of bullshit are you polluting bitcoin with?

[gmaxwell]

Okay I'll play.

"Do you disagree with Satoshi? Do you think miner fees should be the only measure against spam?"

I agree with Satoshi, Bitcoin should be for people to transact without third parties getting to say if they agree with their transactions or not.  Fees aren't the only mechanisms that prevent disruption to the network, not by far-- but they are the safest because they're content neutral and uphold the properties Satoshi set out for bitcoin, and are also necessary to pay for mining as was laid out on day one.

If someone has some time on their hands they can go find the half dozen other posts where you already had this answer.

"Given that ordinals pay half as much in miner fees with a 75% discount, versus a 50% discount for most monetary users, who are the fees really filtering out here?"

Nothing "pays half" in Bitcoin.  The limited resource in blocks is weight, transactions pay fees and miners build the most profitable blocks they can which means they first accept the transactions that pay the most fees per the weight they use.  A transaction with lots of 1 bits in its serialization also pays much less per 1 bit than a typical transaction, but this is irrelevant because Bitcoin's consensus rules and economics don't limit the hamming weight of blocks.

Those data transactions take very little resources for the network to process too.  Bitmexresearch posted a study showing that blocks with many ordinals are processed an order of magnitude faster.   Unsurprising, because the resource limits are setup to model resource costs for the network but only partially credit the cheap to process parts.

If someone has some time on their hands they can go find the half dozen other posts where you already had this answer.

"Given that achow101 censors 12x as many posts as I do, will you commit to also post a negative comment on achow101's profile?"

I've never noticed any reasonable points removed by Achow, nor is achow trying to change the consensus rules of Bitcoin (at all, much less against widespread opposition) although I dunno that I would because I haven't participated in those threads.  You otoh are aggressively flooding the forum with advocacy to gut Bitcoin's functionality to the point where it will literally steal my coins and when I complained about it you deleted my comments.

[PepeLapiu]

Okay I'll play.

"Do you disagree with Satoshi? Do you think miner fees should be the only measure against spam?"

I agree with Satoshi

I don't think you do. Clearly Satoshi was against the idea of Lady Gaga videos and other spam filling the chain. On the other hand, you seem to want that shit on chain. You defended core blowing up a spam filter, and you go against any and every effort to fight spam.

Bitcoin should be for people to transact without third parties getting to say if they agree with their transactions or not.

Given the title of the white paper, and given Satoshi made it clear he didn't like Lady Gaga videos filling up the chain, what sort of "transact without third party" do you think he was talking about? Pokémon cards, baseball cards, jpegs, or money?

Fees aren't the only mechanisms that prevent disruption to the network, not by far--

Okay! What other anti-spam mechanism would you get behind, or suggest? Because so far as of late, you only support the removal of anti-spam measures.

but they are the safest because they're content neutral and uphold the properties Satoshi set out for bitcoin, and are also necessary to pay for mining as was laid out on day one.

Content neutral, you say?
You are saying that Satoshi would support content like spam? Or are you saying you do?
C'mon Greg, tell me. I won't tell anyone what a shtcoin sell out you are. They already know anyways.

If someone has some time on their hands they can go find the half dozen other posts where you already had this answer.

I asked you Greg, I didn't ask the coretards who blindly follow you.

"Given that ordinals pay half as much in miner fees with a 75% discount, versus a 50% discount for most monetary users, who are the fees really filtering out here?"

Nothing "pays half" in Bitcoin.  

I see. So this is where you sit in a circle jerk with your coretard Epstein/block stream followers and you are pretend the Segwit discount is not a thing?

Those data transactions take very little resources for the network to process too.  

"Data transactions" sounds so much better than spam, doesn't it? Like we are pretending they are actual "transactions"?

Bitmexresearch posted a study showing that blocks with many ordinals are processed an order of magnitude faster.  

You are hanging yourself with your own rope, Greg.
Not going to try to fight spam, you use " data transactions" instead of spam, and you emphasize they are easy to process.
I'm sure a jpeg of you sucking Epstein's dick would process real quick, Greg. But that shit doesn't belong on chain, Greg.

"Given that achow101 censors 12x as many posts as I do, will you commit to also post a negative comment on achow101's profile?"

I've never noticed any reasonable points removed by Achow, nor is achow trying to change the consensus rules of Bitcoin (at all, much less against widespread opposition) although I dunno that I would because I haven't participated in those threads.  

Translation: Greg coretard Maxwell don't mind censorship when it's something he doesn't want others to hear.

You otoh are aggressively flooding the forum with advocacy to gut Bitcoin's functionality to the point where it will literally steal my coins.

Stop lying Greg. The only way you could lose your coin with BIP110 is if you are dumb enough to delete your keys. But any time anywhere outside of BIP110, if you delete your keys, you lose your coin.

when I complained about it you deleted my comments.

You never insulted me directly before, aside from your perpetual condescending tone. But on a thread where I said insults and personal attacks will be deleted, you could not resist calling me stupid, or idiot, or something to that effect?