Topic: [ANN] [BSV] [Bitcoin SV] Original Satoshi Vision - page 50. (Read 226361 times)
[/quote]
Be ready investments are on the road. bsv is unbreakable. Thinking about H Finney at this time...
By opening this thread why this error shows up!!!!
** Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer. (Check their trust page to see the detailed trust ratings.) While the bitcointalk.org administration does not verify such claims, you should proceed with extreme caution. **
** Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer. (Check their trust page to see the detailed trust ratings.) While the bitcointalk.org administration does not verify such claims, you should proceed with extreme caution. **
hu
sure there is bold proof ? (otherwhise some agenda?)
This is about original bitcoin - and how it works if it is closest to what Satoshi delivered - locked down, but refactored to scale and use as electronic cash
DYOR
Bitcoin does not correlate with any other thing
BTC only with (troll) number go up
Bitcoin is created for : electronic cash + neat new system that solves micro pay - globally, such that no one cares about the little 'funds' sent, rather the tasks done along
BTC is now locked up, useless ... oh - not (yet) for ponzl-trolll-shilll
Don't invest into things that must be shilled to da moon / in't only speculation
Make use of protocols, that's sustainable
BTC only with (troll) number go up
Bitcoin is created for : electronic cash + neat new system that solves micro pay - globally, such that no one cares about the little 'funds' sent, rather the tasks done along
BTC is now locked up, useless ... oh - not (yet) for ponzl-trolll-shilll
Don't invest into things that must be shilled to da moon / in't only speculation
Make use of protocols, that's sustainable
Where have you been? On a crusade to promot other projects?!?!
Nope, promoting BSV on other platforms, because Bitcointalk is dead. Last important recommendation : don't get into the Trolls' game even if they insult you, ignore them...
LOL. This is not actual. BTT is dead
Breaking all records
https://coingeek.com/bsv-scaling-test-network-achieves-record-breaking-13m-transaction-block/
new
https://coingeek.com/16-4m-transactions-in-a-block-bitcoin-sv-breaks-another-record/
newer
https://coingeek.com/the-bitcoin-bridge-talks-to-xiaohui-liu-about-scrypt-and-unleashing-bitcoins-full-potential/
ppl work hard to get things right - on a stable protocol for industry
https://coingeek.com/bsv-scaling-test-network-achieves-record-breaking-13m-transaction-block/
new
https://coingeek.com/16-4m-transactions-in-a-block-bitcoin-sv-breaks-another-record/
newer
https://coingeek.com/the-bitcoin-bridge-talks-to-xiaohui-liu-about-scrypt-and-unleashing-bitcoins-full-potential/
ppl work hard to get things right - on a stable protocol for industry
I'm glad to know that Craig Wright is fighting to get back what's his, look how beneficial this is as it brings the trolls heads out of their asses a little more often #crigissatoshi and sa pisses you off deeply 🤣
Entire industry should be able to find out what Bitcoin really is. There is a definition and a compliant implementation - keepin out all the changers
16.4M transactions in a block! Bitcoin SV breaks another record
https://coingeek.com/16-4m-transactions-in-a-block-bitcoin-sv-breaks-another-record
https://coingeek.com/16-4m-transactions-in-a-block-bitcoin-sv-breaks-another-record
It's crazy but what is he doing with all these patents?
Simply.... They are building tomorrow's world now
all based on Bitcoin - scaled - industrial - compliant
More things to clear - trolls running wild over twitter (constructing more basless social media hate ... anonymous criminals ...)
https://coingeek.com/theory-of-bitcoin-craig-wright-explains-whats-going-on-with-those-copyright-claims/
but
Always Look at the Bright New Things to Come
https://coingeek.com/the-bitcoin-bridge-looks-nbdomain-and-blockchain-identity-with-jeff-chen/
https://coingeek.com/theory-of-bitcoin-craig-wright-explains-whats-going-on-with-those-copyright-claims/
but
Always Look at the Bright New Things to Come
https://coingeek.com/the-bitcoin-bridge-looks-nbdomain-and-blockchain-identity-with-jeff-chen/
He was clearly wrong
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14132691
and Mike was right
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1596879
but got kicked for that
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14132691
and Mike was right
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1596879
but got kicked for that
Quote
No, the protocol is not locked
Recently Brad Jasper aka @synfonaut started a list of all the pending changes needed to truly revert to the original Bitcoin protocol v0.1. Technically the Bitcoin SV protocol is not locked, despite the assertion being repeated ad-nauseam. In this article I will review those pending changes, some detail and history behind them, but why this fact is not something developers should be worried about when it comes to building on BSV.
Difficulty adjustment algorithm
This is the most radical change from Satoshi’s original protocol and the one that has had profound effects on miner incentives since its modification by BCH developer Amaury Sechet in August 2017. I have written about this in the past. On Brad’s repository, Dean Little adds more reasons why it should be reverted (especially now with the ancestor limit raised):
Source: GitHub
SIGHASH_FORKID
The second most impactful deviation is the addition of a FORKID in the sighash algorithm which adds replay protection, ensuring that transactions spent on BCH would not necessarily need to be spent on BTC. This was another French man special that likely has had unforeseen consequences. Adding replay protection could be interpreted as an admission of defeat by BCH at the time. This move allowed transactions to be broadcast selectively on either chain, ensuring a permanent split persisted.
Additionally, if any offline transactions were created with the nLockTime feature prior to August 2017, then those transactions are now un-spendable on the BCH and BSV chains. The implications are quite interesting given a certain Australian’s fascination with nLockTime, offline transactions and trusts.
Opcode changes
Lastly several opcodes are still disabled. The most mysterious of which is OP_VER, whose purpose is still largely unknown. In the slide below Craig Wright presents that it could be leveraged to implement ‘secondary consensus’ rules (custom opcodes?) which is fascinating considering that one of the huge topics of debate was over an opcode (OP_CHECKDATASIG) during the BCH/BSV split may have been totally unnecessary!
Source: @cryptoAcorns photo from CG London 2020
Along with OP_VER, OP_VERIF and OP_VERNOTIF are also going to be re-enabled in the Chronicle update. Two more opcodes, OP_2MUL and OP_2DIV are supposedly going to be re-enabled but are unnecessary as the same functionality can be replicated by using OP_MUL or OP_DIV (multiplication and division) of any value by two (OP_2).
In conclusion, the above changes will eventually need to be implemented but for the purpose of the ‘set in stone’ narrative, the protocol is just that. My definition mirrors with Elas Digital’s statement below:
Each of the changes I have reviewed may impact different parties in various situations but will not disrupt any businesses being built today in the future. If anything, these restorations can only increase the possibilities of what can be built on Bitcoin, not take away. The future Chronicle update does not yet have a date, but is anticipated to unlock even more potential from Bitcoin.
Source: https://tpow.app/82ddff3d Thanks to Joshua Henslee
Quote
@synfonaut 4 jan.
i’m making this
the stable protocol is too important for there to be any confusion over what should be included
i’ll pay $10 per change that still needs to be reverted/unfucked in BSV
list them below
I didn’t know this, thanks for the explanation @Brendan_Lee__
It would be really helpful to have a list of changes made by BTC/BCH and what still needs to be reverted twitter.com/Brendan_Lee__/…
https://twitter.com/synfonaut/status/1345930291534127104
i’m making this
the stable protocol is too important for there to be any confusion over what should be included
i’ll pay $10 per change that still needs to be reverted/unfucked in BSV
list them below
I didn’t know this, thanks for the explanation @Brendan_Lee__
It would be really helpful to have a list of changes made by BTC/BCH and what still needs to be reverted twitter.com/Brendan_Lee__/…
https://twitter.com/synfonaut/status/1345930291534127104
Recently Brad Jasper aka @synfonaut started a list of all the pending changes needed to truly revert to the original Bitcoin protocol v0.1. Technically the Bitcoin SV protocol is not locked, despite the assertion being repeated ad-nauseam. In this article I will review those pending changes, some detail and history behind them, but why this fact is not something developers should be worried about when it comes to building on BSV.
Difficulty adjustment algorithm
This is the most radical change from Satoshi’s original protocol and the one that has had profound effects on miner incentives since its modification by BCH developer Amaury Sechet in August 2017. I have written about this in the past. On Brad’s repository, Dean Little adds more reasons why it should be reverted (especially now with the ancestor limit raised):
Source: GitHub
SIGHASH_FORKID
The second most impactful deviation is the addition of a FORKID in the sighash algorithm which adds replay protection, ensuring that transactions spent on BCH would not necessarily need to be spent on BTC. This was another French man special that likely has had unforeseen consequences. Adding replay protection could be interpreted as an admission of defeat by BCH at the time. This move allowed transactions to be broadcast selectively on either chain, ensuring a permanent split persisted.
Additionally, if any offline transactions were created with the nLockTime feature prior to August 2017, then those transactions are now un-spendable on the BCH and BSV chains. The implications are quite interesting given a certain Australian’s fascination with nLockTime, offline transactions and trusts.
Opcode changes
Lastly several opcodes are still disabled. The most mysterious of which is OP_VER, whose purpose is still largely unknown. In the slide below Craig Wright presents that it could be leveraged to implement ‘secondary consensus’ rules (custom opcodes?) which is fascinating considering that one of the huge topics of debate was over an opcode (OP_CHECKDATASIG) during the BCH/BSV split may have been totally unnecessary!
Source: @cryptoAcorns photo from CG London 2020
Along with OP_VER, OP_VERIF and OP_VERNOTIF are also going to be re-enabled in the Chronicle update. Two more opcodes, OP_2MUL and OP_2DIV are supposedly going to be re-enabled but are unnecessary as the same functionality can be replicated by using OP_MUL or OP_DIV (multiplication and division) of any value by two (OP_2).
Quote
syn·fo·naut @synfonaut 4 jan
what does it mean for the BSV protocol to be stable?
https://twitter.com/synfonaut/status/1346150883822735361
what does it mean for the BSV protocol to be stable?
https://twitter.com/synfonaut/status/1346150883822735361
In conclusion, the above changes will eventually need to be implemented but for the purpose of the ‘set in stone’ narrative, the protocol is just that. My definition mirrors with Elas Digital’s statement below:
Quote
syn·fo·naut @synfonaut Jan 4, 2021
what does it mean for the BSV protocol to be stable?
Elas Digital@ElasDigital
That the network's rules never change in such a way that something I built ceases to function in the way I built it.
https://twitter.com/synfonaut/status/1346150883822735361
what does it mean for the BSV protocol to be stable?
Elas Digital@ElasDigital
That the network's rules never change in such a way that something I built ceases to function in the way I built it.
https://twitter.com/synfonaut/status/1346150883822735361
Each of the changes I have reviewed may impact different parties in various situations but will not disrupt any businesses being built today in the future. If anything, these restorations can only increase the possibilities of what can be built on Bitcoin, not take away. The future Chronicle update does not yet have a date, but is anticipated to unlock even more potential from Bitcoin.
Source: https://tpow.app/82ddff3d Thanks to Joshua Henslee
Seems all old SPV impls like electrum >> wrong
Much more important stuff coming
https://coingeek.com/sec-flags-digital-currency-companies-allegedly-duping-investors-globally/
Regulatory by govs or self-regulatory - the list getting longer. Individuals (incl CSW) and trolling them not relevant at all, just pulls out the 'qualitiy' of noisy supporters
Anyhow - there is only one Bitcoin impl that might end up existing after
DYOR - create your select CompliantBitcoin from TableOfWannabes where compliant = 'TRUE'
https://coingeek.com/sec-flags-digital-currency-companies-allegedly-duping-investors-globally/
Regulatory by govs or self-regulatory - the list getting longer. Individuals (incl CSW) and trolling them not relevant at all, just pulls out the 'qualitiy' of noisy supporters
Anyhow - there is only one Bitcoin impl that might end up existing after
DYOR - create your select CompliantBitcoin from TableOfWannabes where compliant = 'TRUE'
Quote
Craig Wright comments on social media, software developers and Silicon Valley players
Dr. Craig S. Wright’s latest blog post addresses some of the events that we have seen unfold in the blockchain and digital currency space over the past few days.
In, “A Comment on Social Media, Software Developers, and Silicon Valley Corporations,” Dr. Wright takes a look at the digital currency ecosystem, its participants, and how they have played a part in the progression and alteration of the blockchain and digital currency industry over the years as well as what their involvement insinuates.
Dr. Wright begins by acknowledging that the overarching goals of the blockchain and digital currency space deserve recognition and praise.
“The sentiment expressed by the many in the blockchain space, to change the world and make a system that is open to everyone and to promote financial freedom, is laudable,” says Dr. Wright. He goes on to explain how the digital currency space has taken a turn over the years. From alterations being made to Bitcoin that were not in its blueprint, to corporations and enterprising getting involved and attaching their names to a space that was originally without corporate influence.
Dr. Wright writes, “When I started Bitcoin, no individual taking part in the project at the time maintained any liability for the software, as none of them had any influence on the decisions to implement code changes, which is different to how the project works now. Developers are now acting together for their own benefit, and thus must realise that they are subject to the risks and consequences associated with established legal systems.”
The above statement might also be alluding to the copyright and intellectual property claims that Dr. Wright has on the Bitcoin whitepaper. The whitepaper is officially hosted on Dr. Wright’s website and on BitcoinSV.com, but anyone can use the document anywhere they want as long as they are not using it to illegally pass off technology that does not follow the white paper as Bitcoin.
When using, or rather, misusing, something that you do not have ownership of, you cannot be surprised when legal action is taken against you—something we have seen take place over the last few days. This legal action will likely benefit the broader blockchain and digital currency ecosystem; Dr. Wright even says that he lit this fire in the industry because he:
…needed to get people to start to respond and to question the status quo. To do so, I needed to shake them out of their malaise. I needed them to start reacting.
When news began circulating regarding Bitcoin whitepaper copyright and intellectual property infringement—it forced people to actually read the Bitcoin whitepaper. At that point, many people realized that something they have been calling “digital gold” is actually called, and supposed to be, “peer-to-peer electronic cash.” That being said, what Bitcoin began as is much different than what BTC and BCH turned it into.
Lastly, Dr. Wright touches on the corporations that entered, and somehow, began to spearhead development on the BTC blockchain.
Companies such as Square fund developers as they undertake such projects, increasing the rewards for the developers that own and control the projects. In turn, such Silicon Valley players gain access to the benefits of the projects without assuming the risks of controlling and owning the projects. It is my view that when such projects suffer negative legal judgments, the Silicon Valley companies will have to take up the job of controlling and owning the projects, exposing themselves to the same sort of liability that they have been content to leave with the developers.
Although I found this passage a bit cryptic, we may have clarity on this in the future; Dr. Wright’s legal team has sent Square a notice of copyright enforcement action.
“Certain corporations take advantage of the passion and integrity offered to them through developers who want to do something significant to change the world. They twist it to promote their ends, and minimise the amount of risk that they would face,” says Dr. Wright.
To find out what Dr. Craig S. Wright thinks of the events that have unfolded over the last few days regarding the Bitcoin whitepaper, the corporations and bands of individuals that have high jacked the Bitcoin protocol, as well as why he “kicked the hornet’s nest” in regard to the Bitcoin whitepaper and social media’s reaction, you can learn more in Dr. Craig S. Wright’s latest blog post, “ A Comment on Social Media, Software Developers, and Silicon Valley Corporations.”
Source: https://coingeek.com/craig-wright-comments-on-social-media-software-developers-and-silicon-valley-players/ Thanks to Patrick Thompson
Dr. Craig S. Wright’s latest blog post addresses some of the events that we have seen unfold in the blockchain and digital currency space over the past few days.
In, “A Comment on Social Media, Software Developers, and Silicon Valley Corporations,” Dr. Wright takes a look at the digital currency ecosystem, its participants, and how they have played a part in the progression and alteration of the blockchain and digital currency industry over the years as well as what their involvement insinuates.
Dr. Wright begins by acknowledging that the overarching goals of the blockchain and digital currency space deserve recognition and praise.
“The sentiment expressed by the many in the blockchain space, to change the world and make a system that is open to everyone and to promote financial freedom, is laudable,” says Dr. Wright. He goes on to explain how the digital currency space has taken a turn over the years. From alterations being made to Bitcoin that were not in its blueprint, to corporations and enterprising getting involved and attaching their names to a space that was originally without corporate influence.
Dr. Wright writes, “When I started Bitcoin, no individual taking part in the project at the time maintained any liability for the software, as none of them had any influence on the decisions to implement code changes, which is different to how the project works now. Developers are now acting together for their own benefit, and thus must realise that they are subject to the risks and consequences associated with established legal systems.”
The above statement might also be alluding to the copyright and intellectual property claims that Dr. Wright has on the Bitcoin whitepaper. The whitepaper is officially hosted on Dr. Wright’s website and on BitcoinSV.com, but anyone can use the document anywhere they want as long as they are not using it to illegally pass off technology that does not follow the white paper as Bitcoin.
When using, or rather, misusing, something that you do not have ownership of, you cannot be surprised when legal action is taken against you—something we have seen take place over the last few days. This legal action will likely benefit the broader blockchain and digital currency ecosystem; Dr. Wright even says that he lit this fire in the industry because he:
…needed to get people to start to respond and to question the status quo. To do so, I needed to shake them out of their malaise. I needed them to start reacting.
When news began circulating regarding Bitcoin whitepaper copyright and intellectual property infringement—it forced people to actually read the Bitcoin whitepaper. At that point, many people realized that something they have been calling “digital gold” is actually called, and supposed to be, “peer-to-peer electronic cash.” That being said, what Bitcoin began as is much different than what BTC and BCH turned it into.
Lastly, Dr. Wright touches on the corporations that entered, and somehow, began to spearhead development on the BTC blockchain.
Companies such as Square fund developers as they undertake such projects, increasing the rewards for the developers that own and control the projects. In turn, such Silicon Valley players gain access to the benefits of the projects without assuming the risks of controlling and owning the projects. It is my view that when such projects suffer negative legal judgments, the Silicon Valley companies will have to take up the job of controlling and owning the projects, exposing themselves to the same sort of liability that they have been content to leave with the developers.
Although I found this passage a bit cryptic, we may have clarity on this in the future; Dr. Wright’s legal team has sent Square a notice of copyright enforcement action.
“Certain corporations take advantage of the passion and integrity offered to them through developers who want to do something significant to change the world. They twist it to promote their ends, and minimise the amount of risk that they would face,” says Dr. Wright.
To find out what Dr. Craig S. Wright thinks of the events that have unfolded over the last few days regarding the Bitcoin whitepaper, the corporations and bands of individuals that have high jacked the Bitcoin protocol, as well as why he “kicked the hornet’s nest” in regard to the Bitcoin whitepaper and social media’s reaction, you can learn more in Dr. Craig S. Wright’s latest blog post, “ A Comment on Social Media, Software Developers, and Silicon Valley Corporations.”
Source: https://coingeek.com/craig-wright-comments-on-social-media-software-developers-and-silicon-valley-players/ Thanks to Patrick Thompson
I bet nobody like to read that one - on the denial side. Learn harder
Bitcoin's best feature is the utter boring - TCP/IP or smtp like - stable global adopted protocol
Nice - just scales - that's on the way
Nice - just scales - that's on the way
Nothing to see here
https://news.bitcoin.com/12m-in-satoshi-era-bitcoins-move-21-block-rewards-from-2010-spent-after-a-decade-of-slumber/
only BSV not moved
21 21 21 21 21 ----
https://news.bitcoin.com/12m-in-satoshi-era-bitcoins-move-21-block-rewards-from-2010-spent-after-a-decade-of-slumber/
only BSV not moved
21 21 21 21 21 ----
Information is value
https://coingeek.com/the-bitcoin-bridge-puts-spotlight-on-bitping-bsv-in-australia-and-craig-wright/
Trolly hate - not
Oh - btw: It doesn't really need CSW to clean up all that mess with btc, segwit, LN, RBF, tether, pump... - but it might go quicker
it s coming anyway
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--5310508
https://coingeek.com/the-bitcoin-bridge-puts-spotlight-on-bitping-bsv-in-australia-and-craig-wright/
Trolly hate - not
Oh - btw: It doesn't really need CSW to clean up all that mess with btc, segwit, LN, RBF, tether, pump... - but it might go quicker
it s coming anyway
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--5310508
Jump to: