Bitcoin cash has been rumoured to have viruses in its wallet
Of course, this being a decentralized, permissionless system, there is no 'the' Bitcoin Cash wallet. Which specific Bitcoin Cash wallet is _rumored_ to have viruses?
the wallet is centralized Under government control.
Evidence? Any?
The bcash coins are completely under the control of roger ver
Evidence? Any?
he wishes to destroy Bitcoin with the tactics of manipulating the users..
Seems awfully unlikely to me. Any evidence?
beware roger ver controls over 50% of bcash coins
So of course, you have a listing of his wallet addresses so you can back up your claim. Hint: here is where you back up your claim by providing a list of Roger Ver's BCH addresses demonstrating ownership of over 50% Bitcoin Cash. Right?
will be interesting to see if this troll can have any comment that includes some proof. I will not hold any breath waiting though..
As a non believer in BCH this may come as a surprise to you but most of these claims so seem to be false
1. Yes there will be some wallet somewhere that does contain viruses but
the dominant full node is virus free2. The wallet is not under government control but the heart of BCH is under control of the one's financing it
3.
I wouldn't say the coins are completely under the control of ver, nChain (Wright), coingeek (Ayre), and bitmain (Wu) control a huge share too
4. All BCH holders wish to destroy bitcoin as they see BCh as being bitcoin
5. As stated earlier
I doubt ver controls 50% of coins maybe 10-20% along with his buddies but
I would guess between Ver, Wright, Ayre, Wu combined that they could quite easily control at least 50% of all circulating coins
So you already admit to 1, 3, and 5 being unsupported by evidence.
For number 2 - no evidence supplied. Put up or shut up.
4: False. While I view BCH as The One True Bitcoin, I would not want to see it destroyed. Further, it would be detrimental to my finances for even BTC to be destroyed. From public statements, he (Roger Ver) also holds a lot of BTC. Accordingly, him seeking to destroy Bitcoin would be irrational - whether BCH or BTC.
Hey tek: did you just miss this post?:
Finally. We get to something concrete and debatable. Thanks.
Yes they are proposals nothing more I'm not saying that any will be adopted just that their is a chance
Exactly.
Three people met and discussed what -- if anything -- to do about malleability. The outcome:
nothing at this time. Slight preference for MalFix, but no consensus.
True, one of the participants was the individual who currently leads the market-leading client implementation. Was he the holdout? Who knows? Doesn't matter.
But
you fail to support your claim that MalFix would result in Bitcoin Cash abandoning Bitcoin's tried and true security model. Again, put up or shut up. You may just be parroting my observation that The SegWit Omnibus Changeset has caused Bitcoin Segwit to abandon Bitcoin's tried and true security model. But you seem to fundamentally misunderstand Bitcoin. For it is not the separation of sig from tx within The SegWit Omnibus Changeset that has abandoned Bitcoin's security model. Rather, it is the misguided abortional crude hack of
pretending that an anyonecanspend tx is anything other than exactly that, which has opened post- SegWit Omnibus Changeset Bitcoin Segwit to a myriad of new attack vectors.
Go sharpen your pencil and get back to us.
Again, until you provide some evidence,
all can safely consider this claim debunked, dispatched, and discredited.
As for Bitcoin Cash users won't accept being forced into a new system the whole premise of Bitcoin cash is users nodes don't matter only mining nodes matter
Again, you fundamentally misunderstand Bitcoin. Non-mining, fully-validating clients (often misrepresented as 'full nodes') have no power to effect the network itself. This is true whether discussing Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Segwit, or any other PoW satoshi-pattern cryptocurrency. Miners have the power to enact any change they want to - or the majority thereof does. This power is counterbalanced
only by the power of users and holders to abandon any chain that does not implement the characteristics they desire. In contrast, the only power non-mining, fully-validating clients possess is to divorce themselves from the network. Period. Other than suiciding themselves, they do not affect they network in any way.
The above is true regardless of Bitcoin Cash or Bitcoin Segwit. For better or for worse, this is the system satoshi bequeathed us. True, miners are likely to use such chain abandonment as a signal of user/hodler displeasure. However, they are fully aware that such non-mining, fully-validating clients are subject to Sybil attacks. The only non-Sybillable resources are mining power and Bitcoin ownership, which is what makes the system work to begin with.
so you will get forced if the exchanges upgrade and the miners upgrade the users are forced to either upgrade or sell taking huge losses
Exactly - and exactly identical for Bitcoin SegWit as for Bitcoin Cash.
The only reason BTC users can have a say is the users run the majority of the nodes therefore the miners etc won't switch as it's not in their interest to mine something the vast majority of users define worthless
No. Non-mining, fully-validating clients are the only entities in the system subject to Sybil attack. While they bring benefits to their owners, they do nothing for the network itself. They are merely a
Sybiled proxy for economic power. Again,
this is exactly identical for Bitcoin SegWit as for Bitcoin Cash.
Still waiting on your rebuttal. Since days.
