news about BitmainCash or BitmainABC or the real BCH or whatever...
Source:
https://bitcoinexchangeguide.com/bitmain-abc-fork-details-bitcoin-cash-bch-chain-split-controversy-is-real/
Topic: [ANN] Bitcoin Cash - Pro on-chain scaling - Cheaper fees - page 119. (Read 704812 times)
Dramatic Comedy continues
news about BitmainCash or BitmainABC or the real BCH or whatever...
Source:
https://bitcoinexchangeguide.com/bitmain-abc-fork-details-bitcoin-cash-bch-chain-split-controversy-is-real/
news about BitmainCash or BitmainABC or the real BCH or whatever...
Source:
https://bitcoinexchangeguide.com/bitmain-abc-fork-details-bitcoin-cash-bch-chain-split-controversy-is-real/
Pigeoncoin got exploited for 230 million of their coins from the bitcoin bug and they have since patched it. Thats one of the alts i know of that the exploit was active on as well.
OK again, so no public proof = no proof.
Absolutely. You have no public proof that CSW is not satoshi.
For the record: I am ambivalent on the matter. He may be; he may not. But you are falling upon the argument of the most fallacious nature. Lack of proof is not proof of the converse.
If he is THE SATOSHI... then why o why Roger the Ver keeps talking about Satoshi like some spirit super creator and btc whitepaper as his gospel ?
Even Bitmain Lord JW called him Fake Satoshi.
Case closed.
The same guy also said:
‘Fuck your mother if you want fuck’
OK again, so no public proof = no proof.
Absolutely. You have no public proof that CSW is not satoshi.
For the record: I am ambivalent on the matter. He may be; he may not. But you are falling upon the argument of the most fallacious nature. Lack of proof is not proof of the converse.
If he is THE SATOSHI... then why o why Roger the Ver keeps talking about Satoshi like some spirit super creator and btc whitepaper as his gospel ?
Even Bitmain Lord JW called him Fake Satoshi.
Case closed.
LOL Since when is someone being ambivalent suggest that someone "believes" anything? It's like calling someone who is agnostic a religious zealot.
Just because you say you are something it doesn't mean you are. Obviously he cares otherwise he wouldn't have injected himself into the discussion. Not like anybody was asking him about his opinion.
Saying I have no proof that somebody isn't some anonymous person is simply rehashing the definition of what "anonymous" is. It's a rather stupid, obvious statement for him to make.
OK again, so no public proof = no proof.
Absolutely. You have no public proof that CSW is not satoshi.
For the record: I am ambivalent on the matter. He may be; he may not. But you are falling upon the argument of the most fallacious nature. Lack of proof is not proof of the converse.
And you have no proof that I'm not Satoshi either. Neither have you proof that my grandma is not Satoshi. This is a stupid fucking argument but if you want to continue to believe that a bull-headed narcissist, an egotistical, mean-spirited sociopath is Satoshi, despite an utter lack of evidence, that's your right as a human citizen. Have at it.
There's a raging Flat Earth argument in Off Topic that could probably use your help in its defense.
LOL Since when is someone being ambivalent suggest that someone "believes" anything? It's like calling someone who is agnostic a religious zealot.
OK again, so no public proof = no proof.
Absolutely. You have no public proof that CSW is not satoshi.
For the record: I am ambivalent on the matter. He may be; he may not. But you are falling upon the argument of the most fallacious nature. Lack of proof is not proof of the converse.
And you have no proof that I'm not Satoshi either. Neither have you proof that my grandma is not Satoshi. This is a stupid fucking argument but if you want to continue to believe that a bull-headed narcissist, an egotistical, mean-spirited sociopath is Satoshi, despite an utter lack of evidence, that's your right as a human citizen. Have at it.
There's a raging Flat Earth argument in Off Topic that could probably use your help in its defense.
OK again, so no public proof = no proof.
Absolutely. You have no public proof that CSW is not satoshi.
For the record: I am ambivalent on the matter. He may be; he may not. But you are falling upon the argument of the most fallacious nature. Lack of proof is not proof of the converse.
If Craig was Satoshi, why would he need to pull an elaborate hoax on Gavin Andresen where he presented keys that were already publicly available, embedded in the blockchain?
Careful with your assumptions there.
You have absolutely _no_idea_ what evidence CSW presented to Gavin.
Well, unless you are either Gavin or CSW -- both of which I find extremely unlikely.
So then why do so many people in the crypto community trash CSW and call him a scammer when there is legally verified evidence that he was a part of satoshi?
The community has not been presented with legally verified evidence that he was part of satoshi.
POMP NAO!
He deliberately made the public proof in his blog unbelievable, and his private proof to Andresen believable, all Gavin says now is he regrets getting dragged into the find satoshi game where CSW is for some reason happy to antagonise guys like you. I agree with Gavin though, in retrospect he should not have posted his supportive blog until after craig made a compelling public proof. CSW wants to be the bad guy in bitcoin, who knows why, but he does.
OK again, so no public proof = no proof.
He doesn't antagonize me, its people like you who won't let reality damage their extraordinarily unfounded outlook that antagonizes me. You're free to believe what you want, but I prefer to believe in things backed by evidence. I'm sure you also believe BCH is the real bitcoin too so what's the point in continuing this silly discussion. You're only feeding the ego of one of crypto's biggest con artists.
I think that he is the real Faketoshi,
and BitcoinCash is the real Bcash.
There can be only one...
and BitcoinCash is the real Bcash.
There can be only one...
CSW is a savant with poor social skills..and hes Australian
Aussie guys can be quite weird , CSW is pretty normal by down under standards.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-09/in-search-of-trough-man-an-icon-of-sydneys-1980s-gay-scene/8496200
None of us knows the proof gavin saw, all we know is it satisfiec him, and then craig chose to make his public proofs dodgy, but I suspect all will be revealed eventually.
Actually its all very, very public and very easy to understand how Craig was pulling over a fast one on poor Gavin. The debate of whether Craig is a charlatan or not has long been over with. Everybody knows he was lying. Its facetious to pretend its still up in the air.
https://www.ccn.com/gavin-andersen-craig-wright-blog-mistake/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qLI3VIHuKU
Besides, never in any of his public communications was Satoshi 1/10th as big an asshole as CSW is on any given day. And unless CSW has an opposite sleep pattern from 99% of all human beings on earth their sleep cycles do not match up. The reasons why CSW is NOT Satoshi are many and varied and its fallacious of you to continue pretending any doubt remains in the matter.
CSW is a savant with poor social skills..and hes Australian
None of us knows the proof gavin saw, all we know is it satisfiec him, and then craig chose to make his public proofs dodgy, but I suspect all will be revealed eventually.
Actually its all very, very public and very easy to understand how Craig was pulling over a fast one on poor Gavin. The debate of whether Craig is a charlatan or not has long been over with. Everybody knows he was lying. Its facetious to pretend its still up in the air.
https://www.ccn.com/gavin-andersen-craig-wright-blog-mistake/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qLI3VIHuKU
Besides, never in any of his public communications was Satoshi 1/10th as big an asshole as CSW is on any given day. And unless CSW has an opposite sleep pattern from 99% of all human beings on earth their sleep cycles do not match up. The reasons why CSW is NOT Satoshi are many and varied and its fallacious of you to continue pretending any doubt remains in the matter.
Andresen still thinks CSW is satoshi, and states clearly he wont discuss any of the private personal details that convinced him, as I said before CSW wants guys like you to discredit and doubt him, and you're doing what he wants. He deliberately made the public proof in his blog unbelievable, and his private proof to Andresen believable, all Gavin says now is he regrets getting dragged into the find satoshi game where CSW is for some reason happy to antagonise guys like you. I agree with Gavin though, in retrospect he should not have posted his supportive blog until after craig made a compelling public proof. CSW wants to be the bad guy in bitcoin, who knows why, but he does.
None of us knows the proof gavin saw, all we know is it satisfiec him, and then craig chose to make his public proofs dodgy, but I suspect all will be revealed eventually.
Actually its all very, very public and very easy to understand how Craig was pulling over a fast one on poor Gavin. The debate of whether Craig is a charlatan or not has long been over with. Everybody knows he was lying. Its facetious to pretend its still up in the air.
https://www.ccn.com/gavin-andersen-craig-wright-blog-mistake/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qLI3VIHuKU
Besides, never in any of his public communications was Satoshi 1/10th as big an asshole as CSW is on any given day. And unless CSW has an opposite sleep pattern from 99% of all human beings on earth their sleep cycles do not match up. The reasons why CSW is NOT Satoshi are many and varied and its fallacious of you to continue pretending any doubt remains in the matter.
Jump to: