jonald_fyookball
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1004
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
|
 |
July 14, 2014, 03:11:59 AM |
|
not even worth debunking this... time to abandon thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unlike traditional banking where clients have only a few account numbers, with Bitcoin people can create an unlimited number of accounts (addresses). This can be used to easily track payments, and it improves anonymity.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
vintagetrex (OP)
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:14:24 AM |
|
Calm down: Even if that really happened, it was Alpha software...Gavin fixed it and now BTC is growing up.  No, this was in 2010, over 2 years after bitcoin was released. |
|
|
|
|
Bit_Happy
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2100
Merit: 1040
A Great Time to Start Something!
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:16:38 AM |
|
Calm down: Even if that really happened, it was Alpha software...Gavin fixed it and now BTC is growing up. No, this was in 2010, over 2 years after bitcoin was released. Bitcoin was released in 2009, and 'Alpha' can last more than a year. Details are important, please be more accurate.  |
|
|
|
|
vintagetrex (OP)
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:20:21 AM |
|
Calm down: Even if that really happened, it was Alpha software...Gavin fixed it and now BTC is growing up. No, this was in 2010, over 2 years after bitcoin was released. Bitcoin was released in 2009, and 'Alpha' can last more than a year. Details are important, please be more accurate. please say how the community unanimously elected through democracy to give Satoshi 1,000,000 bitcoins when his software failed |
|
|
|
|
Bit_Happy
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2100
Merit: 1040
A Great Time to Start Something!
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:24:15 AM |
|
please say how the community unanimously elected through democracy to give Satoshi 1,000,000 bitcoins when his software failed
Satoshi charged a very high fee for his services.  Seriously, the large early mining isn't "fair" but he did announce it publicly, so many people think it was done properly. |
|
|
|
|
vintagetrex (OP)
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:26:51 AM |
|
please say how the community unanimously elected through democracy to give Satoshi 1,000,000 bitcoins when his software failed
Satoshi charged a very high fee for his services. Seriously, the large early mining isn't "fair" but he did announce it publicly, so many people think it was done properly. And then his network failed and rather than fork and restart… Gavin Andresen (on the take) restores the previous proportions of BTC distribution and continues from there. |
|
|
|
|
|
darkota
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:30:48 AM |
|
vitnage, thats because they didnt think Bitcoin would make it as large as it is today, they cant freaking see the future.
Calm your tits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
vintagetrex (OP)
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:33:46 AM |
|
vitnage, thats because they didnt think Bitcoin would make it as large as it is today, they cant freaking see the future.
Calm your tits.
No, its because Bitcoin claims to be transparent and democratic, but it has been corrupt from the beginning. Community members have propagated this lie of equality to get open source developers to work on Bitcoin. However, Bitcoin is a rat hole investment scheme that utilized the Winklevoss twins as front men to push prices higher. It is the same scam outlined in "The Wolf of Wall Street." |
|
|
|
|
|
darkota
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:35:29 AM |
|
vitnage, thats because they didnt think Bitcoin would make it as large as it is today, they cant freaking see the future.
Calm your tits.
No, its because Bitcoin claims to be transparent and democratic, but it has been corrupt from the beginning. Community members have propagated this lie of equality to get open source developers to work on Bitcoin. However, Bitcoin is a rat hole investment scheme that utilized the Winklevoss twins as front men to push prices higher. It is the same scam outlined in "The Wolf of Wall Street." Oh, yea because the first days of Bitcoin, flaws were found as it was the first cryptocurrency ever made, and because it had a few flaws while in early Beta, that means the whole thing is corrupt. Yea your logic makes complete sense...(sarcasm) |
|
|
|
|
|
vintagetrex (OP)
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:35:55 AM |
|
The only claim of bit coin's productivity:
"It costs almost nothing to move nothing around the world!!!"
IT MIGHT AS WELL BE A SHAMWOW INFOMERCIAL
|
|
|
|
|
|
vintagetrex (OP)
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:37:56 AM |
|
vitnage, thats because they didnt think Bitcoin would make it as large as it is today, they cant freaking see the future.
Calm your tits.
No, its because Bitcoin claims to be transparent and democratic, but it has been corrupt from the beginning. Community members have propagated this lie of equality to get open source developers to work on Bitcoin. However, Bitcoin is a rat hole investment scheme that utilized the Winklevoss twins as front men to push prices higher. It is the same scam outlined in "The Wolf of Wall Street." Oh, yea because the first days of Bitcoin, flaws were found as it was the first cryptocurrency ever made, and because it had a few flaws while in early Beta, that means the whole thing is corrupt. Yea your logic makes complete sense...(sarcasm) After 1 year of mining and 2 years of vetting the software had a fatal flaw. The distribution of BTC didn't restart tho… Gavin Andresen stepped in to save the profits of the organization paying him. |
|
|
|
|
|
darkota
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:44:19 AM |
|
vitnage, thats because they didnt think Bitcoin would make it as large as it is today, they cant freaking see the future.
Calm your tits.
No, its because Bitcoin claims to be transparent and democratic, but it has been corrupt from the beginning. Community members have propagated this lie of equality to get open source developers to work on Bitcoin. However, Bitcoin is a rat hole investment scheme that utilized the Winklevoss twins as front men to push prices higher. It is the same scam outlined in "The Wolf of Wall Street." Oh, yea because the first days of Bitcoin, flaws were found as it was the first cryptocurrency ever made, and because it had a few flaws while in early Beta, that means the whole thing is corrupt. Yea your logic makes complete sense...(sarcasm) After 1 year of mining and 2 years of vetting the software had a fatal flaw. The distribution of BTC didn't restart tho… Gavin Andresen stepped in to save the profits of the organization paying him. Yea after 1 year(not yet 2 years), in relative obscurity with only a few individuals(less than 100) even knowing Bitcoin existed. And satoshi only started working on it in 2007, and it was released in 2009. so 2009-2010 is 1 year. As I said again, they didnt know Bitcoin would reach this far, and the software did not have a fatal flaw.....Talking to you(a troll) who continues to lie is just pathetic. Im not gonna bother responding to your lies anymore. Pce BTW, what drugs are you high on right now? |
|
|
|
|
|
vintagetrex (OP)
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:51:14 AM |
|
Yea after 1 year(not yet 2 years), in relative obscurity with only a few individuals(less than 100) even knowing Bitcoin existed. And satoshi only started working on it in 2007, and it was released in 2009. so 2009-2010 is 1 year.
As I said again, they didnt know Bitcoin would reach this far, and the software did not have a fatal flaw.....Talking to you(a troll) who continues to lie is just pathetic. Im not gonna bother responding to your lies anymore. Pce
BTW, what drugs are you high on right now?
Except you can't point out where I've lied… Not a fatal flaw? Being able to arbitrarily create 184,000,000,000 BTC is not a fatal flaw in your opinion? |
|
|
|
|
|
darkota
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:52:15 AM |
|
Yea after 1 year(not yet 2 years), in relative obscurity with only a few individuals(less than 100) even knowing Bitcoin existed. And satoshi only started working on it in 2007, and it was released in 2009. so 2009-2010 is 1 year.
As I said again, they didnt know Bitcoin would reach this far, and the software did not have a fatal flaw.....Talking to you(a troll) who continues to lie is just pathetic. Im not gonna bother responding to your lies anymore. Pce
BTW, what drugs are you high on right now?
Except you can't point out where I've lied… Not a fatal flaw? Being able to arbitrarily create 184,000,000,000 BTC is not a fatal flaw in your opinion? In case you havent noticed, that problem was already solved...back in fucking 2010. Take your trolling elsewhere. |
|
|
|
|
jonald_fyookball
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1004
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:55:40 AM |
|
this will be my last post in this thread. From the wiki (from Myths section) (myth:) Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior
The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, Satoshi Nakamoto, and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.
Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.
Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.
There are also other Bitcoin clients made by other developers that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.
|
|
|
|
|
vintagetrex (OP)
|
|
July 14, 2014, 03:57:29 AM |
|
Yea after 1 year(not yet 2 years), in relative obscurity with only a few individuals(less than 100) even knowing Bitcoin existed. And satoshi only started working on it in 2007, and it was released in 2009. so 2009-2010 is 1 year.
As I said again, they didnt know Bitcoin would reach this far, and the software did not have a fatal flaw.....Talking to you(a troll) who continues to lie is just pathetic. Im not gonna bother responding to your lies anymore. Pce
BTW, what drugs are you high on right now?
Except you can't point out where I've lied… Not a fatal flaw? Being able to arbitrarily create 184,000,000,000 BTC is not a fatal flaw in your opinion? In case you havent noticed, that problem was already solved...back in fucking 2010. Take your trolling elsewhere. Yes, and the proportions of BTC returned to an even distribution? Oh wait, they didn't. In your mind the community "unanimously democratically elected" to award Satoshi Nakamoto 1,000,000 BTC. Oh wait, Gavin Andresen is on the pay roll of some organization… and he's the one who decided how the BTC would be distributed after the fatal flaw… |
|
|
|
|
Yakamoto
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1007
|
|
July 14, 2014, 04:00:42 AM |
|
Yea after 1 year(not yet 2 years), in relative obscurity with only a few individuals(less than 100) even knowing Bitcoin existed. And satoshi only started working on it in 2007, and it was released in 2009. so 2009-2010 is 1 year.
As I said again, they didnt know Bitcoin would reach this far, and the software did not have a fatal flaw.....Talking to you(a troll) who continues to lie is just pathetic. Im not gonna bother responding to your lies anymore. Pce
BTW, what drugs are you high on right now?
Except you can't point out where I've lied… Not a fatal flaw? Being able to arbitrarily create 184,000,000,000 BTC is not a fatal flaw in your opinion? *Yakamoto has entered the ring* If it's so bloody fatal, why do we not see 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 artificial coins everywhere? The issue was solved, and it was reset to preserve Bitcoin, but it may very well have been just to save profits. I doubt the latter, however, as BTC was maybe dollars back then. Not tens or hundreds. You tried. |
|
|
|
|
|
darkota
|
|
July 14, 2014, 04:05:02 AM |
|
Yea after 1 year(not yet 2 years), in relative obscurity with only a few individuals(less than 100) even knowing Bitcoin existed. And satoshi only started working on it in 2007, and it was released in 2009. so 2009-2010 is 1 year.
As I said again, they didnt know Bitcoin would reach this far, and the software did not have a fatal flaw.....Talking to you(a troll) who continues to lie is just pathetic. Im not gonna bother responding to your lies anymore. Pce
BTW, what drugs are you high on right now?
Except you can't point out where I've lied… Not a fatal flaw? Being able to arbitrarily create 184,000,000,000 BTC is not a fatal flaw in your opinion? In case you havent noticed, that problem was already solved...back in fucking 2010. Take your trolling elsewhere. Yes, and the proportions of BTC returned to an even distribution? Oh wait, they didn't. In your mind the community "unanimously democratically elected" to award Satoshi Nakamoto 1,000,000 BTC. Oh wait, Gavin Andresen is on the pay roll of some organization… and he's the one who decided how the BTC would be distributed after the fatal flaw… Are you this damn stupid. Back then, 1 BTC wasnt even worth $1. Gavin was on no one's payroll. There was NO bitcoin foundation. There were no mining companies. It was simply an error, and they didnt think btc would get to be this big. |
|
|
|
|
|
vintagetrex (OP)
|
|
July 14, 2014, 04:05:49 AM |
|
Yea after 1 year(not yet 2 years), in relative obscurity with only a few individuals(less than 100) even knowing Bitcoin existed. And satoshi only started working on it in 2007, and it was released in 2009. so 2009-2010 is 1 year.
As I said again, they didnt know Bitcoin would reach this far, and the software did not have a fatal flaw.....Talking to you(a troll) who continues to lie is just pathetic. Im not gonna bother responding to your lies anymore. Pce
BTW, what drugs are you high on right now?
Except you can't point out where I've lied… Not a fatal flaw? Being able to arbitrarily create 184,000,000,000 BTC is not a fatal flaw in your opinion? *Yakamoto has entered the ring* If it's so bloody fatal, why do we not see 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 artificial coins everywhere? The issue was solved, and it was reset to preserve Bitcoin, but it may very well have been just to save profits. I doubt the latter, however, as BTC was maybe dollars back then. Not tens or hundreds. You tried. No, it was *fixed* so Gavin Andresen could save his boss' money. However, there was no reset, just corruption moving forward in a corrupt manner. |
|
|
|
|
|
vintagetrex (OP)
|
|
July 14, 2014, 04:08:45 AM
Last edit: July 14, 2014, 04:21:08 AM by vintagetrex |
|
Nobody can deny the levels of corruption in crypto currency at the moment. It is absurd! This has to end somehow!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
