Pages:
Author

Topic: [ANN] [BSV] [Bitcoin SV] Original Satoshi Vision - page 58. (Read 226395 times)

full member
Activity: 626
Merit: 234
You have trust issues  Grin
Oh this is a best free promotion company for BSV on this hostile forum Grin
full member
Activity: 626
Merit: 234
It's a success. All pools and services actively begin to collaborate with BSV
It’s no longer profitable for anyone to be in the overheated BTC market


All the trolls were in the big ass. Old fart Nutildah with his young filipino mate must be crying
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale
 
  Hey, Biffwright, I'm just passing through. Am I the only one who doesn't get fooled around here I don't think is far off. You're boring, you're openly hogging technology made by the real nakamoto not by you sir. Bitcoin is designed to belong to everyone across, time, space and even quantum worlds, it's a timestmaping register serving as function pieces for its bases of a technology from the end of a millennium Milky Way, nothing to do with your big blocks that will remain. The quantum nuclide entanglements generate very small information it is a specific "energy of information" which one needs a precise register as atomic such as proposes the eliptic encryption sha256d with its specific advantages that I will not quote here, future technology depends on it but a function of the vs K allows the back door which itself is used to mark the quantum stop of the temporal state, this is the primary function of the quantum and temporal entanglement jump, another track the dematerialization of states needs a frequency drop point, the universe moves and we move with it the information is a frequency that needs a Bitstamped track.

  Dear Biffwright, despite your repeated loss of time, your intelligence vibrates, but does not (yet) focus on the essential. Besides your plans it is also about being the real story in the time to come. Your actions may be focused, not for nothing, but the information you spread about the origin and the actions taken are corrupted, you know it, correct it. Let this imaginary past leave you. Stop forcing the coffers of your ego because justice is for all some call too, the deep awareness leading to the awakening of the maestro.

  Hereby I am asking you to reflect with all your consciences: you are a researcher and doctoral student, it is time to realize another path intelligently committed to peace in the name of the one who launched Bitcoin in AD 2008 and undermined its first block in AD 2009 the one called BTC (in his respect the best). Even if it all seems blurry today. Focus your resources. Deploy your true utility - the one that ignites your deepest passion to really engage in Bitcoin code. Know that only cosmic peace matters, the cosmos watches over your time. What remains to be accomplished in your lifetime is waiting for you. Wake up Doctor, rebel against yourself, you are your own hope for building strong bridges between all.



  The time running for each world your stories are a waste of time, understand that you who are not satoshi are far too precious to be wasted.



It's time for me to bypass, take care of the world.


PS: control your lymphatic fluid it's like hormonal periods for women.



Ns is Ns = not 🦄




 
Quote
Think about hyperinteroperability. Maestros will come the time when you need to agree to unify networks and protocols to form one, Bitcoin's original BTC code is that.  It's the unification of multi-layered nodal worlds to prevent major supra-quantum anachronisms in the future.BCH BTG BSV BTD BBBBBBB and many many others are Bitcoin under a single BTC banner that is why it was deployed at a time that will surpass you.  Have you ever wondered if satoshi hasn't been born yet?

It's time to wake up reading this. It's time to Bitcoin is Unity.


I m sure you mean Utility

And sending funds anonymously or speculation on ponzi is not
full member
Activity: 626
Merit: 234
And your founder is claiming to be that criminal.

How amusing you are.

I'm glad you ban is up it was getting boring without your moronic posts.

You guys are freaks. BSV makes everyone rich. The potential od BSV is huge and it's silly not to see that.

And BTC is overvalued and manipulated by anonymous "whales"

BTC is hopelessly obsolete. Now BTC is just a "king of scam". Non-transaprent and unregulated. Technologies of the past
full member
Activity: 626
Merit: 234
So that means that BSV is founded by a criminal?
Nope. You mixed everything up

- BSV is founded by a public person
- BTC is founded by an anonymous criminals
full member
Activity: 626
Merit: 234
BSV just works.
Well said. And unlike BTC, BSV is more transparent

BTC exchange rate is manipulated by a group of anonymous whales. This is not good
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale
BitCoin loves big blocks - that makes it work and live - long term


Trolls love big blogs and big memes - that makes them 'live' - short term.


Do your own research what Satoshi delivered - that is magic enough and takes you years to get a glimps

Do not get in the speculation mode - that and your bags will most likely turn you into evil trolls


Never invest into assets you dont understand - but you can use BitCoin as it works for any enterprise that needs an open ledger for better transparency ( like WireCard just recently...)

 
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale

Why are you still shilling your One World Government UScoin where only US citizens have representation? (e.g. Huawei would see all of their assets frozen and would've went bankrupt had they used your shitcoin) Pretty clean that no one is dumb enough to fall for that.


Just plain BitCoin

no governance needed


not even (feature) devs - just scale what Satoshi gave us


Step x .. isnt that not bit odd?

https://cointelegraph.com/news/binance-pool-is-now-the-largest-bitcoin-sv-miner


BTW:  there is no clear definition of 'decentral' - there is only 'no governance needed' - just for 'bug' (crime?) fixing

Or - you ve to ask a few BIG guys (courts / devs+miners) to get enforcement - pretty much the US long arm does to enforce things on the globe




So it's come down to this? Congrats, at this point your logic managed to offend intelligence of even the most retarded person who might've considered touching your shitcoin before reading your gibberish. But don't let me stop you, you still have your "unable to read", "don't speak english" and "comprehension issues" audience. Carry on...

Nahh, just lol.

There is true logic that works

And

Haters gonna hate. But never get things done.


BSV just works. Get over it
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale

Why are you still shilling your One World Government UScoin where only US citizens have representation? (e.g. Huawei would see all of their assets frozen and would've went bankrupt had they used your shitcoin) Pretty clean that no one is dumb enough to fall for that.

Just plain BitCoin

no governance needed

not even (feature) devs - just scale what Satoshi gave us
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale
Summary for Hardware Wallets

https://medium.com/@roger.taylor/hardware-wallets-electrumsv-14338735e4a1

Paperwallets are also quit ok ...

Wink
member
Activity: 180
Merit: 20
CW could be the CEO of facebook. Open google and search his face. Its made out of of twitches. Very inconsistent and plasterized as if its a hologram. And those featureless drab eyes that roll to the sides and back as if someone pulls the ropes. Yes, reptiloid he is. This is 100% legit. I have done research on him and what piqued my interest was Marks video where he acts strange when denying the fact of being a reptile. CW is him. A reptile.
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale
Unfucked, unrecked untrolled

New service on BitCoin

https://peergame.com/

Good luck, who needs gaming these days
hero member
Activity: 1050
Merit: 604
legendary
Activity: 3080
Merit: 1688
lose: unfind ... loose: untight
...snip...

The real satoshi told you what happens to minority forks ...

A second version would be a massive development and maintenance hassle for me.  It's hard enough maintaining backward compatibility while upgrading the network without a second version locking things in.  If the second version screwed up, the user experience would reflect badly on both, although it would at least reinforce to users the importance of staying with the official version.  If someone was getting ready to fork a second version, I would have to air a lot of disclaimers about the risks of using a minority version.  This is a design where the majority version wins if there's any disagreement, and that can be pretty ugly for the minority version and I'd rather not go into it, and I don't have to as long as there's only one version.

I know, most developers don't like their software forked, but I have real technical reasons in this case.


...snip...

...


The real satoshi is talking about the possibility of future chain forks here (i.e. BCH and BSV etc.,)

No, the real satoshi is clearly NOT talking about the possibility of future chain forks in your quoted passage. The real satoshi is manifestly speaking to the topic of alternate client software implementations working on the same blockchain.

What was it he said in the same discussion immediately preceding? Oh yes:

I don't believe a second, compatible implementation of Bitcoin will ever be a good idea.  So much of the design depends on all nodes getting exactly identical results in lockstep that a second implementation would be a menace to the network.  The MIT license is compatible with all other licenses and commercial uses, so there is no need to rewrite it from a licensing standpoint.

...snip...

Not so and your entirely missing the point that the real satoshi was making.

BSV is the menace to the network, both the forked chain and the bastardized software implementation. No distinction, BCH included.

BTC is the original Bitcoin implementation.

BSV (and BCH) are no longer compatible nor in lockstep with the original Bitcoin (BTC).

Craig Wright is NOT satoshi.


No. In your quoted bit, Satoshi was clearly speaking of an alternate client implementation working upon the same blockchain. There is simply no other way to interpret 'all nodes getting identical results in lockstep'. If you can't see that, your [sic] a special type of stupid. Or maybe just willfully, delusionally ignorant.

Yet your telling me I'm supposedly "a special type of stupid. Or maybe just willfully, delusionally ignorant.", when you think BSV is the 'original' Bitcoin.

Yup. Not because we disagree on which sha256 blockchain tracing its ancestry to satoshi's genesis block is the preferred. But rather because you have some completely nonsensical interpretation of one of satoshi's utterances, and you cling to this flawed interpretation, trying to buttress some vacuous point, to which it has absolutely no relation whatsoever.

So you were publicly posting on this forum about 5 quarters before me. Do you think that entitles you to some special insight? Riiiight.

Quote
I know who the real Satoshi Nakamoto is with 99.9% certainty.

And the answer is...?

Right - what I thought.

Quote
Satoshi Nakamoto is NOT Craig Wright.

Go on, prove me wrong! We are waiting and we will have the last laugh.

I have no reason to try to prove you wrong. You are utterly without effect. OTOH, I make no representations as to the identity of Satoshi.

The value of a Bitcoin unhampered by an insane centrally planned production quota upon transaction throughput exists completely independent of the identity of its creator. The entire CSW drama is an irrelevant sideshow.

Quote
Done here now.

Good. Every day that you do not return will make that day just that much sunnier.
hv_
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1055
Clean Code and Scale
Step x .. isnt that not bit odd?

https://cointelegraph.com/news/binance-pool-is-now-the-largest-bitcoin-sv-miner


BTW:  there is no clear definition of 'decentral' - there is only 'no governance needed' - just for 'bug' (crime?) fixing

Or - you ve to ask a few BIG guys (courts / devs+miners) to get enforcement - pretty much the US long arm does to enforce things on the globe
legendary
Activity: 3080
Merit: 1688
lose: unfind ... loose: untight
But "law is law" is the fundamental pillar to BSv, your opinion directly contradicts that of Faketoshi and CSW. You must realize that without Faketoshi's obnoxious claims and Ayre's bank account, there is no BSV, or are you in denial to that as well?

You really need some new go-to 'talking points'. 'Aussie man bad' and 'pedo man bad' are played out. The market is not listening to you. You have heaps and heaps of ammunition, should your tropes have any relevance at all. But they don't.

As posted above: SpongeBobNobodyCares.png

'Law is law' is not relevant to BSV. Seems relevant to Craig, but again: CSW != BSV. After so much repeated evidence of this truism, you'd think you'd get it through your thick skull. But no.



The real satoshi told you what happens to minority forks ...

A second version would be a massive development and maintenance hassle for me.  It's hard enough maintaining backward compatibility while upgrading the network without a second version locking things in.  If the second version screwed up, the user experience would reflect badly on both, although it would at least reinforce to users the importance of staying with the official version.  If someone was getting ready to fork a second version, I would have to air a lot of disclaimers about the risks of using a minority version.  This is a design where the majority version wins if there's any disagreement, and that can be pretty ugly for the minority version and I'd rather not go into it, and I don't have to as long as there's only one version.

I know, most developers don't like their software forked, but I have real technical reasons in this case.


...snip...

...


The real satoshi is talking about the possibility of future chain forks here (i.e. BCH and BSV etc.,)

No, the real satoshi is clearly NOT talking about the possibility of future chain forks in your quoted passage. The real satoshi is manifestly speaking to the topic of alternate client software implementations working on the same blockchain.

What was it he said in the same discussion immediately preceding? Oh yes:

I don't believe a second, compatible implementation of Bitcoin will ever be a good idea.  So much of the design depends on all nodes getting exactly identical results in lockstep that a second implementation would be a menace to the network.  The MIT license is compatible with all other licenses and commercial uses, so there is no need to rewrite it from a licensing standpoint.

...snip...

Not so and your entirely missing the point that the real satoshi was making.

No. In your quoted bit, Satoshi was clearly speaking of an alternate client implementation working upon the same blockchain. There is simply no other way to interpret 'all nodes getting identical results in lockstep'. If you can't see that, your [sic] a special type of stupid. Or maybe just willfully, delusionally ignorant.
Pages:
Jump to: