Create account

BitcoinSV is “the most powerful Bitcoin ever created.” That’s how I introduce it.
replied · 183d
Yep, that's why it is down to 41.00. LMAO. Shit Version and Calvin Dairy Ayre going to 0. But that's what they told everybody they would do. You should listen.
replied · 183d
You can’t look at the price alone. You’re a smart guy. I’m buying a seriously rediculous amount of this daily. Read the BitcoinSV roadmap. Simplicity and power is key.
You're basically buying shares of a company. They own the whole thing, there is no room for competition in SV. It's a corporate owned and operated chain.
replied · 183d
BitcoinSV is what Satoshi wanted. No discussions. So far, this product is breaking records others struggled with and still struggle with (realize ABC failed to manage high tx volumes)
replied · 183d
I highly doubt Satoshi would have wanted his project to be subject to the whims of someone as unprofessional, egocentric and quick to anger as CSW. He wanted no one in charge
replied · 182d
We don't know. We can only go by what Satoshi has written. I will hold BitcoinSV accountable to sticking to it.
replied · 182d
You will hold SV accountable? LMAO. Or what? You will sell your coins? Don't worry you won't get anything for them anyway .
Would not be hard to mine and propagate big blocks when it's all in the same data center connected with 100gig fiber. It's a centralized corporate product plain and simple. No question
replied · 183d
Failed? Besides, achieving a 64 MB block that takes 40 mins to propagate and NO increase on sustained throughput is not really that impressive. Watch when CTOR comes into effect ;-)
replied · 182d
When Graphene will be rolled out it'll eat 128MB blocks for breakfast.
replied · 182d
Wonderful. We'll see 1500 ICOs p/s and no store of value added by them.
replied · 182d
You're optimistic.
replied · 182d
Like Ethereum, ICOs add store of value when they are expensive to mine. ICOs need to be profitable businesses, not speculative tokens. Scripts, not DSV and oracles.
replied · 183d
Remind me in 18 months lol. It’s on! Love competion. Breeds the best product
replied · 183d
Or the best death. Nothing to be ashamed of when valiant efforts fail.
replied · 182d
Or earns respect. CSW has been insulted way too much. He is holding up against Jihan, Roger, Haipo, Jiang, PoSM. Jihan has already proved to be weak (Core).
replied · 182d
Yep he is insulted way too much. The guy that threatens mining at 0 for years. And that's exactly what will happen. Good luck
replied · 182d
nchain, coingeek and csw have earned every criticism and I understand why people step over the line to insults although I don't want to do it myself. How did he get to you hoarder? :(
replied · 182d
Sorry there is more. I really didn’t like when BTC miners let BCH starve for hash and laughed at mining it for “spiritual” support. Those miners don’t get it. I mined BCH
replied · 182d
Hey thanks for taking the time to talk. I still have hope that you will make a big swap over to BCHABC and we can have that global party when adoption goes through the roof one day.
replied · 182d
I mined BCH 100% too man. It's not black and white though. For people who mine BTC and sell it for BCH, it has an impact also.
replied · 182d
That’s the wrong way to do it. The market gives value to the greater PoW chain. This is partially why BTC value collapsed with hashwar when hash left the chain.
replied · 181d
Without data this is a religion. I want it to be true but we have continuous daily evidence that hash power follows price between BCH and BTC and every other crypto that shares an algo
replied · 181d
Not every one. Not mine. I’m 100% on BCH since October 3rd last year, and now 100% SVpool.
replied · 178d
I'm 100% BCH since August 1 2017, the day of the BCH-BTC fork. PM me on reddit if you want to hash it out more. I will keep hoping you come back to promote Bitcoin Cash.
replied · 177d
Bitcoin Cash is redundant (peer-to-peer electronic Cash Cash) and ABC has mutilated it. I need what Satoshi envisioned and hope u fight for what you see as the true Bitcoin one day too
replied · 176d
I promote it every day. I think "ABC has mutilated it" is empty rhetoric. What do you think about a `miner_id` soft fork? Is that ok with you? Where do you think it is going?
replied · 181d
Damn
replied · 182d
And I need massive scaling. 64MB blocks and 1,500 txns/s rates already achieved gets me pumped. Not another decade of “fixing” Bitcoin.
replied · 182d
No one knows the future, but I predict you are going to be disappointed with SV in the long term. The recent big blocks were squeezing water from a stone, and still didn't get 128MB
replied · 182d
Finally Jihan really disappointed me letting Core take BTC. And he gives the devs too much free reign.
replied · 182d
I definitely worry about ABC becoming a reference client like Core did. But look at SV. It is 100% the reference client with a clear corporate master that will dictate future rules :(
replied · 182d
... but ABC had so much clout this time because bitmain and so many other miners were behind them. Not the other way around.
replied · 182d
Well we can agree about BTC. I still think Jihan clearly believes in the spirit of permissionless p2p cash.
replied · 182d
I always missed the original BTC with zero conf, some free transactions, fast confirmations. It worked well. I just wanted that back plus massive scaling. SV brings bitcoin back...
replied · 182d
We already had all that. BU currently scales better than either SV or ABC. But BU's changes work on both chains. SV has done nothing for scaling. ABC is taking steps for it.
replied · 182d
I wasn't talking about Bitcoin. I mean proof of work. It may be possible to relaunch bitcoin for AI only someday.
replied · 183d
Finally something that makes sense :-)
replied · 183d
And establishing your own record counts for little when it is just yourself trying. The mighty 128MB block has not been reached, so you've definitely failed, even on your own terms
replied · 182d
It hasn't even been a week. We shall get there. (Remember that ABC hasn't even hit 32 MB blocks yet).
replied · 183d
Amaury-Bitmain Coin is massively centralized. 3 updates in 1 week. No discussions.
replied · 183d
Non censensus updates. Learn the difference.
replied · 182d
Autmatic checkpoints is a non consensus change ? Wtf
replied · 182d
Actually no. Not all node implementations need to follow it.
replied · 183d
I didn’t say consensus! Look at what I wrote in the blockchain for the record 😉
replied · 183d
So, NOTHING to do with centralization. For instance BU or the other do not have to adhere to these updates.
replied · 182d
Centralized checkpoints by Amaury. That ruins confidence for 0 conf. Im glad I didnt have to worry about that (or other change)
replied · 182d
How checkpoints affect 0-conf txs?
replied · 182d
If the devs don’t have enough confidence and need the checkpoints, how can merchants have confidence in 0-conf?
replied · 182d
Merchants can have more confidence because checkpoints make deep re-orgs more difficult to perform.
replied · 182d
if miners stayed on the chain for security and not only transiently to win a hash war, that would build the most confidence. Jihan should supply that mental security to his devs
replied · 182d
replied · 182d
That’s more experimentation, what I didn’t like to begin with.
replied · 182d
Cough cough. Bullshit.
replied · 182d
As long as it sticks to the white paper, there needs to be a power base to protect it from people like you and roger.
replied · 182d
Yes, the base layer will be set in stone, as intended. No competition there. Plenty of room for devs to build and compete on top of this highly scalable architecture.
replied · 183d
Yep, you know it too. You said it exactly perfect.
replied · 183d
If you mean most powerful at evaporating value, destroying good will and throwing a wrench at community collaboration, then sure, it is.
replied · 183d
I look at objective qualities in the product, like a Tesla. Doesn’t matter if Elon Musk smokes weed-The Roaster for 2020 still goes 0-60 in 1.9 seconds. So I’m blind to drama