Topic: it is Core, not Bitman blocking segwit - page 2. (Read 5420 times)

What your fatal flaw in your reasoning is that your timeline of events does not
expound upon anything other than what the community already knows. My
original comment to Jonald was pointing out that Jonald was taking the situation
at face value. You yourself have done so as well. You do not attempt to understand
why things occurred as they did. You use what superficially did occur, as evidence
of miners individual innocence and good faith. That is an incorrect connection and
cannot be found in your outline.

What you are accusing me of, is exactly what you are now doing. What your current
argument really is, is that “since a person came to the police station and willingly
gave some information about a murder, that person must not be the murderer”.
That is your whole argument in its simplest form and does not prove that the person
who willingly went to the police station is NOT the murderer. Your timeline has lots
of points and time aspects, but has no deductions or actual analysis to fit your final
belief.

You wanted to attack my passing statement to Jonald so strongly that you were
blinded to the fact that your explanation doesn’t disprove what my opinion was
intended to convey. You nitpicked my wording to Jonald, which in the past you
accused me of doing incorrectly. You are a big hypocritical mess. My statement
to Jonald was intended to point out that he was assuming good faith of some
miners during the HK meeting and that was his only basis of belief.

I concluded that Antpool likely did not do their due diligence, because then why
would they willingly sign an agreement that broke their chip’s advantage? But, it
is possible they did do their due diligence, as you are arguing here, but then that
conclusion is that they went to the HK meeting knowing this important detail,
never telling other miners or devs about this detail, signing a document to use a
protocol change that damages this detail, and now you want the community to
believe that they always intended to follow through with the agreement and
disband future use of detail, only because they say they would have?

If we take your belief that they did know it breaks their ASICBoost aspect why
would they sign that agreement? They create hundreds, maybe thousands of chips
that contain that design for the purpose of current or future use. You want to
community to believe they did that to waste money and they were willing to take
that as a financial loss with the SegWit activation and future. That is naïve. Either
Antpool is dumb or you are. When I commented to Jonald, I assumed AntPool was
negligent, now due to your timeline, I think they were intentionally deceptive. That
is what you missed in your outline and glossed over. You never came to any possible
answers. You whole posting is designed to make me look like a “bullshitter”, but yet
you never prove my point wrong, just my phraseology.

Ultimately, your simplistic belief makes no sense over all. So the true motive and
answer is still missing and that is what the HK agreement/ASICBoost/SegWit current
debate is all about. It’s about trying to understand what may be the deeper issues
here. Not the superficial that you outline and any person can do. Your kill switch so
far is lacking in the kill part. If anything it adds to my argument because you unwilling
or willing omitted elaborations or discussion into the inconsistencies.

So lets now talk about what you like to talk about: conspiracies. So here is an
interesting one that came from your superficial timeline. Without your timeline, I would
not have been able to articulate this, thank you. Please explain where I am wrong
in this as well:

If we assume you are correct about Antpool knowing SegWit broke their ASICBoost,
how could they look like they agree to use SegWit in the future when they do not
actually want to, and prevent any agreement from being fully fulfilled so they can
claimed the devs did not uphold their part of the agreement later? The only way I can
think of right now is to place a clause in the agreement that could have never been
performed or implemented because it is so contentious in the community. And what
clause was in the agreement that the devs stated they couldn’t do, but the miners kept
pushing the issue for inclusion? The 2MB hardfork clause. The ASICBoost miners used
the 2MB hardfork clause as a mechanism to dissolve the HK agreement at a later date,
knowing full well it could never have been done. In addition, Antpool would hold out
many months after that fact, when other miners were already calling fail, because they
wanted to cover their true motives of ASICboost. They waited so long after the deadline
because they wanted to portray themselves as you are now doing, as a victim of the big
bad devs. So you are doing their dirty work by helping protect their conspiracy from
the beginning. You are a part of their plan to dissolve the HK agreement thus freeing
them from needing to use SegWit. That is why your timeline does not expand on any
issues or deductions and jumps to an incorrect conclusion that AntPool wanted SegWit
and would have always used it, even though it voided their patents.

So, if my conspiracy conclusion is right, you are either a moron or working for obfuscation,
which I stated to Jonald on page 1. You can never prove your stand point of this issue from
what you provided. If anything, it shows problems and inconsistencies with Antpool’s
overall argument.




Wonderful. Your attacks on me once again make you look like a horse’s ass.
Nothing you stated prior proved you right. All that you did was say you think
miners had one month to test on SegWit and I said I didn’t think they did yet.
Wow wee you are a genius. How many days did it take you to write this crap
again?

Your whole argument to prove me wrong is based on one of my comments to
Jonald taken to an extreme that I never argued as an absolute and then you apply
it to every comment I made after the fact, like a robot. Because you say or believe
something doesn’t make it so. Too bad for you, your simple mind is stuck in your
self created box.

Hey everyone, look Alex.BTC got me because I said miners didn’t do their due
diligence. Onh no, he says they did, So I’m wrong about everything I ever said
about numerous and separate issues. Oh no..

Please Alex.BTC, if this was part 1 of the “Kill Switch” I really hope Part 2 is better.
Your whole argument against me is based on a single sentence with phraseology
you don’t like. Meanwhile I crafted a conspiracy theory from your timeline that is
more likely then AntPool agreeing to willing break their chips and patents.

You try so hard to cover the miners asses you might as well kiss them instead.

If I've told you once I've told you a thousand times.
You got burned because you acted like a know-it-all authority and trolled me by name, here:


You then continued to act like an authority with bullshits like:

There were pages of these, but you had absolutely no idea what you were talking about the whole god damn time.

Here, this little nugget of yours really takes the cake:


I dont understand why the most uninformed and delusional noob on this forum is acting like some kind of authority of past, current and future reality.

Here is an idea, if you know you're a noob, why don't you just shut the fuck up.

I've never seen anyone on here who know so little but talk so much bullshit.

None of this would have happened if you didn't stick your head so far up your ass.

My arguments are more valid than any of yours. Mine attempt to explain the
situations rationally, whether they are correct or not. Also, I admit being
wrong if I think I was wrong. Majority of yours are conspiracy and paranoia,
and must always be correct since your ego seems invested. You have never
admitted to being wrong once and have constantly deflected onto new issues
with claims of trying to bait, trap, and outmaneuver me. This is a blatant sign
that you don't care about anything other than you ego, which is boring.
Ego is major league boring and usually leads to self destruction.

This overall conversation has become boring since it is not about specific
Bitcoin related issues anymore. You have devolved this discussion now into
a more base level. Your following statements shows how low you are willing
to go to prove me wrong in any way possible.  




This is great! I'm really proud of you now. You are working too hard on a
noob who only arrived in Late 2013 and has admitted on numerous occasions
that I have no programming, higher end computer knowledge, or knowledge
in most of the fields that Bitcoin encompasses in general. You are wasting your
time in a monumental way, but it is enjoyable because I like to see how far you
will go in efforts to discredit or attack someone who has admitted to being
fallible and not fully knowledgeable. It is like you are blind, deaf, and dumb
and marching forward into the fire. Nothing matters to you, except yourself.

There is an aspect of delusion and madness that is normally worrisome in
person, yet fascinating when at a safe distance. This is one of those enjoyable
moments for me. All of your current comments are entirely not necessary if
your original facts were indeed correct. Remember when I outlined each of your
six factual points and why I though they were not facts? Oh how far you have
fallen. None of your current statements have anything to do with that. So I must
assume you have now acquiesced that those facts were not facts and thus on this
new topic.

The fact that you are attacking me in such a manner now must mean that for
some reason I am a threat to you (or likely your ego), which is sad for two
reasons; (1) you are accusing me of being a "classic low information low IQ INFP",
yet you were arguing with me about conspiracies and non-facts and attempting to
argue that they were indeed facts or truths, which are usually done by those
who have "low information low IQ", and (2) according to the standard, I would
be aligned to the "INTP" scale, though unlike you, admit it is overall worthless
since personality types are irrelevant in most real world cases and are usually
combinations of all and not a strict adherence to one.

You using "personality types" which are subjective and less science, are a cop out
argument that weak debaters need to resort to. By saying my words are capable
of blinding people's ability to understand the truth is remarkable. Either you are
saying the majority of people are stupid and can not think for themselves and
have agreed with me already (yet there are not any other comments in this
thread other than us), or you are saying you are stupid and somehow when I
talked plainly, it was confusing to you.

In addition, since you are attempting to pigeonholed me into a box of
classification, I will take that as a badge of honor since you have now resorted
to attributing an incorrect caricature of myself in order to preserve your own
identity and beliefs. In my world, that is a great success and failure. It is a
success since you have now done more harm to yourself and understating than
I could have ever done intentionally, and a failure, since if you listened to my
words prior, you would not have needed to go down this road since I was being
sincere and plain. You willingly went down this road of escalation and self
destruction, because in reality you had no other recourse.




Yes, you have discovered my major weakness.
Talking in the first person plural gets me hot. You figured it out!
I have become moderately aroused and look forward to reading the kill switch.
I will respond after I have fully absorbed your kill switch posts.

Part 2 - AgentofCoin's prophecies

One thing I like about AgentofCoin is his energy.

He believed in his own delusions so much he probably didn't even know he's lying. (A classic INFP trait)

He repeatedly dived head first into his own delusion, made false statements, correct others, launched personal attacks, even created prophecies, all base on something that is completely false.

He was completely oblivious to how stupid he'd look when his bullshit is exposed.

It takes talent to do that, I like people with talents,
If he didn't troll me by name I probably would have just let him do his thing. But he did, so here we are.

Let's look at AgentofCoin's prophecies:

See that definitive and authoritative attitude?

That's the kind of talent you need when you want to act like a prophet.

You have to act like you've already seen the future.

Now let's look at what he said about acting like a prophet:


See that talent in bullshitting? It just oozes out nonstop, one after another.
It really takes talent to bullshit so often in so many details.
Even my ass is jealous of the amount of bullshit that came out of his mouth.

Oh and one more juicy prophecy nugget from AgentofCoin, way back in 2014:


Two of AgentofCoin's paragraph style in this thread was exactly like Greg's, it got me curious for a while.
So I checked his first page of post to see how much his posts would resembled Greg's. Turned out the first things he did after coming to this board was to make prophecies.

If I can find 3 prophecies in this thread and another prophecy in his first few posts ever on this board, I am sure he made plenty of others prophecies, but showing 4 prophecies is enough, I can't be fucked looking for more.

I was going to write Part 3 - AgentofCoin's sensual side.
Once INFP realize their tactics don't work, they play emotional guilt trip.

But I got bored. Once I knew what AgentofCoin is, what his tactics are, I realize I've already learned them before, so he's no longer a challenge or interest. Even more so after I've made him look like an ass.

AgentofCoin's Weak Logic

If AgentofCoin relied less on delusions and apply stronger logic, I might have played for longer, but these type of low logic replies just make people lose interest quickly:


If I say to the president of any country:"If I have to lie like a dumb fuck on tv all the time, I'd quit in a week", AgentofCoin's logic is that I have the same job as that president. I don't know what to tell you, but these arguments are just too retarded, they're not even fun to rebut.

By the way, I placed a trap door in INFP, but it doesn't matter, at this point AgentofCoin is no longer a challenge.

Oh btw, If we wait long enough, I am sure AgentofCoin's prohecy of "Jihan will no longer support that Ext Block proposal." will come true, maybe after 50-100 years.

Thanks for playing.

Part 1 - AgentofCoin's delusions.

AgentofCoin's delusional began right from the start, so let's go back to the beginning, when he tried to bullshit jonald_fyookball with his own delusion on page 1.


Notice how:
1. AgentofCoin defines a new reality right from the get go.

2. AgentofCoin then began to describe that delusion: When the miners signed the HK agreement, they had no idea ASICBoost wouldn't work. Miners would never support SegWit if there is a 'new coinbase reference' ('new coinbase reference' is AgentofCoin's way of discribing the 'witness root hash', the thing in the coinbase that makes ASICBoost useless.)

3. AgentofCoin also claimed Jihan only pulled support from SegWit after he realized ASICBoost would not work on SegWit.

In short, AgentofCoin is claiming miners would not agree to any proposal that makes ASICBoost useless.

Note that this argument is what AgentofCoin insisted to the end, it is the main argument that all his other delusion/sub-argument/prophecies/personal-attacks are base on, if this is proven false, at least 80% of the bullshit he posted after is also false.

Now let's do a reality check:
1. The 'Hong Kong Agreement' was signed on 21st Feb 2016. (Source).

2. The 12th Jan 2016 version of BIP-141 (SegWit), is already incompatible with ASICBoost, because the coinbase has something call the 'witness root hash'. Quote BIP-141:'The new commitment in coinbase transaction is a hash of the witness root hash' (Link).

3. This is further clarified on the 24th Jan 2016 'Clarify txid and wtxid' update of BIP-141 (SegWit), in which it stated the 'witness root hash' contains a list of 'wtxid', when witness is not used, wtxid value is the same as normal txid. So, the 'witness root hash' contains a list of transaction id, this is what makes ASICBoost incompatible.

4. I repeat: SegWit has been factually proven to be incompatible with ASICBoost since 24th Jan 2016. (So is Ext Block, because it is base on BIP-141 aka SegWit)

5. Miners had almost a month to find out that ASICBoost wouldn't work with SegWit, before the signing of the agreement.

6. Miners continued to support SegWit long after the agreement was signed.

7. The one thing that made ASICBoost useless, the 'witness root hash', was already defined in 24th Jan 2016, 28 days before the signing of the agreement. The 'witness root hash' hasn't changed much since.

8. Jihan, as one of the agreement's signatory, had plenty of time to learn that ASICBoost wouldn't work on SegWit.

9. Remember, AgentofCoin is a guy who kept arguing over Jihan could learn about SegWit changes in 1hr or 2hr, so 28 days should be plenty for Jihan to learn that SegWit wouldn't work for ASICBoost.

'witness root hash'
'witness root hash' is what makes ASICBoost meaningless, this is common knowledge to those familiar with the basics of SegWit and ASICBoost.
A quote from the Dev & Tech forum mod will prove this:

So now we know that:
1. AgentofCoin is delusional or dishonest.
2. AgentofCoin likes to make statements that are simply not true.
3. AgentofCoin likes to argue with people using his delusion/dishonesty.
4. AgentofCoin likes to pretend to understand how miners think.
5. AgentofCoin likes to think he knows more than the miners.
6. AgentofCoin does not have the basic knowledge required to talk about ASICBoost and SegWit.
7. AgentofCoin likes to describe his delusion/lies in more details that are completely made up, instead of keep quiet when he doesn't understand what is being discussed.
8. AgentofCoin is the kind of guy that'll bullshit to the end unless you utterly expose him, even then, he might still continue his bullshit.

We also know that:
At least 80% of AgentofCoin's argument is this thread is now proved to be false, because AgentofCoin based those arguments on:

1. Miners would not have known that SegWit was incompatible with ASICBoost when they signed the agreement.
2. Miners would not support any proposal that support ASICBoost.

When you stack one bullshit on top of another, all people need to do is crack open the first one, and the entire bullshit structure falls apart like a house of cards.

Now we've established AgentofCoin is a delusional lying retard who likes to talk shit.
Let's move onto part 2 and talk about his 'prophecies'.

Since AgentofCoin made a lot of bullshit arguments and personal attacks base on a bunch of predictions.
I gave it a few more days so AgentofCoin have more time to solidify his 'false prophet' status.


So not only am I dealing with a dishonest Blockstream shill, I am actually also dealing with a classic low information low IQ INFP.

INFP are very strong in emotion and imagination, but very weak in handling logic, facts and structure.

They think facts and logic should bend to imagination, not the other way around.

When they debate, they think it's a race of out-imagining the other guy, they also think if they can describe their imagination in detail, the other guy should agree, even if their delusion is base on complete bullshit.

Sometimes INFP knows they are bullshitting, but they're hoping by describing the bullshit in great detail, others will be distracted and won't be able to catch up.

I like to toy with shills and trolls that have an attitude.

So AgentofCoin, I am going to completely and utterly expose your strategy, and point out exactly where you tried to bullshit people.

If you've just tuned in and this is the first time you read AgentofCoin's post, keep in mind AgentofCoin is a classic INFP so his tactic would be 1. Create a false reality in his head. 2. Describe the false reality in detail to confuse and distract you.

AgentofCoin, the reason you keep doubting the fact that I baited you all along
was because this is probably the first time you've met people like us.

People like us like challenges, but we play the players, not the game, because we like to understand how things work.
Once we got the facts and logic straight, we know when people are lying, that doesn't concern us.
We are more interested in what you are, how you work and why you do what you do, more than what you actually say.
We see talent in people, we are always looking for new talents and new challenges.

When you present yourself as a challenge,
we treat everything like chess, we place baits, we set traps.
By the time you wiggle out of one there is another one waiting.
We toy with our opponents like a cat toy with a mouse.
From the way they react, we analyze their strengths and weaknesses.
Map out their logic, understand their patterns, absorb all their tactics for future use.
Once we lose interest, we press the kill switch that was created right at the start.

I am losing interest, so here is the kill switch you never saw coming.

Remember, you asked for this when you mentioned my name in page 1. I never asked for you.

Bitcoin classic claims to have the solution:

https://bitcoinclassic.com/devel/Quadratic%20Hashing.html

Read here to see one of the technical reasons why we can't increase the base blocksize.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitcoin-unlimited-doesnt-fix-quadratic-hashing-1866275

Well, as for being unbiased, it doesn't matter. Moderators have a right to their
opinion too as long as they don't abuse their mod powers to prevent your opinion.
If you are not breaking any rules or anything and they maliciously delete your posts
or etc, then you should message Theymos or a higher mod with that evidence.

Whether anything will be done is unknown to me, but I think as long as a mod doesn't
step over certain lines, it should be fine.

But I do think Mods for the Development and Technical Sections need people who are
knowledgeable in such, since if I was a mod there and you started talking computer
programming nonsense that didn't actually mean anything, I wouldn't know the
difference. You wouldn't put an Spanish only speaker as the mod for the Korean
sub-boards, right? Lol. That is why I think Dev and Tech boards need fluent mods.




Yes. I want what is fair. I don't want imbalance in the Bitcoin network or the
community. Some problems are inevitable, such as the blocksize debate because
there is two separate ideologies vying for the single chain and future, but that
doesn't mean we should feed into the things that exacerbate some problems.

If fair accommodations could be made in some situations, they should be done.
It is better to do those to appease unhappy parties, than to inflame issues that
can spiral out of control and create future unknown problems.

where did you read this, can you provide the link?
Im just confuse after they've been found out using an exploit called asicboost and was so against of segwit
And now they've decided to support it?

nope.
i actually went to the document where Jiang Zhuoer himself was writing.

the thing i do is if i see something.. i find the source. if someone says the source is a news article. i then look at a news article and find that news articles source. and i go right back to the real source.

sometimes these things are circle jerks where one "news" site is just quoting another news site which has quoted a reddit post from someone not involved, who then quotes another news site which has quoted another non-involved person.. and i just facepalm it.

but hey. maybe thats because my concentration span can last longer than 2 paragraphs and i dont just take things on face value, nor 'trust' something because 'it must be backed because 100+ people acknowledge it.

for instance i have yet to see any time that a release from core actually get 100 'Acks'
for instance i have yet to see any time that a release from core actually get 100 'Acks' and where those 100 people have read every single line of code.

for instance. there is a guy that put a pull request to mention gitian in a document to get himself named as 'one of the 100' contributors. but i know for sure he has not read every single line of code.. care to guess who im talking about, or am i being too subtle?

I can sit here with a straight face because I believe it. If I didn't then I would
be arguing for the opposite position. Your interpretation of events are too simplistic
to be reality. If it was then the reality is boring and people didn't try hard enough
to do as you claim. If it really was a conspiracy, you wouldn't ever see it coming.

SegWit was set to 95% miner Consensus which is very high.
They did this because they understood it needs to be a high threshold for multiple
different issues and for overall network safety. The fact that they placed it that high,
shows they are not just ramming it in.

SegWit softfork was a compromise of the two separate issues, tps increase and  
retaining decentralization. If it doesn't go forward, it is because the community is not
ready for it or because certain miners are purposefully blocking it for their own self
interests that are not consistent with the interests of the community.

Core Developers didn't think they had miners in the pockets, they thought miners
were rational people who wanted security with value increase in the network. They
didn't think certain miners would risk the destruction of the network for simple 2MB.
That is illogical, and thus why people now think ASICBoost makes more sense. 2MB
bring no where near the amount of profit as ASICBoost 100 million USD extra profit
does.

If the miners are truly innocent, they are dumb for playing right into the
conspirators' hands. All they have to do it denounce ASICBoost and accept the patch.
Then they will eliminate their enemies, yet they do not. This is because they are not
innocent, but likely caught red handed. The miners are acting like bad politicians now.
Miners should make public statements as to their positions on a patch. Their silence
on this specific issue is telling and only fuels the communities doubts of them.

They are their own worse enemies. They do not seek correction, they double down.



Every comment you say has some personal attack against me. That's a sign of a weak
argument and a bullshit artist. Looking into every detail is what people are supposed to
do. The fact that you consider that a negative aspect is bizarre to me. You are so simplistic
that your current statements contradict what it means to have critical thinking and
understanding.

In addition, your statements about me playing dumb: Where am I playing dumb? Has it
occurred to your little brain that I don't know everything, unlike how you conduct yourself,
and thus there are gaps in my full knowledge? I guess not since you are determined to
define me as a troll or something, so that your prior incorrect arguments could be salvaged
to be true to the ignorant reader. Your arguments only convey to those readers that you don't
really care about Bitcoin and the overall community, only your own interests and those of your
employers.

BTW, you just admitted that you are a paid shiller/troller, from your "I'd quite in a week"
if you had to "play the dumb fuck routine" comment. As I said before, no one can pay
enough to deal with you, I just do it to correct the record.

To any reader (which is not likely anymore) they can see I have not make any crazy claims.
My only major claim was to "wait till there is a proper investigation" before claiming there is
no ASICBoost issue here. But for some unknown reason, that is a threat or seen as inappropriate
to you and others, which only fuels that movement due to the defensive nature you take.




Lol. I think this rant of yours is one of the better ones so far.

First, you told me you set a trap, then I "wiggled out" of it by proving your argument
wrong, and instead of admitting that and moving on, now you are saying you had a
secondary trap within the first trap, like this is the movie "Inception" or something, lol.
Now you can only explain your failures by saying I'm acting dumb and repeating bullshits
when in actuality all I did was showed your original conspiracy theory was based on incorrect
timeline information. You were wrong and now creating a misdirection. This is a clear tactic
not of someone with good faith.

You just keep doubling downing on falsehoods after falsehoods, and also with attacks on
myself to cover your own weak original argument. This is somewhat enjoyable because people
like you and hwat you are doing is proving to the community there are either a paid shill
campaign occurring or just a malicious intelligence agent causing confusion.

You have changed your original argument and can't admit that because you are a weak child
who needs to cover their flaws like a child who mistakenly shat their pants. Grow up and
admit that your Ext Block GitHub Conspiracy was proven wrong by one sentence from me.
Don't change the subject to how what a wonderful and rational businessman Jihan is and
how he thinks and what he did or did not do. You don't know jack shit about Jihan and if
you did its only because you are Jihan himself, or he pays you and tells you how to proceed.




No, your statement is incorrect, Patents are not to win but as a claim of ownership
and deterrent. If you willing violate the patent owner's rights or just unaware of them,
you are equally liable. Ignorance of the law is not a defense. You are ignoring whole
aspects of patent law and its different purposes, just to make your argument reflect
better upon ASICBoost patent holders. Patent holders not only created this legal issue,
but are also the only ones who can alleviate those legal issues.

I stated some patent theory and different possibles such as Jihan freely opening his patent
for any miner to use. Instead of agreeing with me, which you should have, you say I'm wrong
and think it is irrelevant. Then argue that miners should build their own chips, likely in
violation of those patent owners rights and patent laws. That is a joke. Next you are going
to argue that those miners should pay license fees to the ASICBoost patent holders, lol.

That will never happen not only for legal reasons but also because no non-ASICBoost miner
will do the R&D into this now or pay licensees fees. It is easier to patch this exploit and
everyone continues as is. Your suggestion overall creates a new paradigm within the Bitcoin
Mining community which condones cheating and exploiting the code as a new standard. Now
on one hand this is good since it helps discover exploitable aspects in mining that can be used
by attacking state actors, but if those discoveries are allowed to be the standard future mining
implementation, then that is bad for Bitcoin's future for many different reasons.
So it must be patched. If you are fine with that, then we can agree there.




For the record, majority of the economies support SegWit and already implemented the
code into their systems. Majority of Exchanges and wallets are all waiting for the activation.
So, the only people who currently are "ditching" SegWit are the large miners who are holding
it hostage for certain "unknown" reasons. They want the community to think it is over a 2MB
HK Agreement which is too simplistic to take seriously. No normal person can believe that.




That's too bad because if you paid attention, you wouldn't have wasted your time trying to
fight someone who is probably one of the few real people in the community who stands by
Bitcoin for reasons that go beyond the lowly animalistic reasons. I think bitcoin will have
future importance that your brain has not anticipated yet. Bitcoin wasn't made for this century.
There is a higher purpose than just as a simple payment processor. That was trap you fell into.

Jihan's motives for blocking Litecoin SegWit are extremely strong.  If Litecoin's SegWit went through, all of his power would start crumbling in front of his eyes from the amount of miners that actually support SegWit - clearly a huge amount of BU's hashrate on Bitcoin is just Jihan Wu. So what's to stop him manipulating Litecoin, with a much lower total hashrate, so that it doesn't put pressure on him to give up with BU on Bitcoin?  Why wouldn't he do that?

All Jihan needs to do is control just enough mining power to stop Litecoin from going over the 75% threshold, and he can make a tidy profit in the process.  Why do you think Litecoin's SegWit has been hovering around 70% for ages?

My bad. I've improperly expressed myself. Jihan is pointing hashrate to both of those pools (of which 1 he owns). Besides, how hard is it to appoint *insert random name* as a pool *founder* in the name of decentralization? Jihan did it on Bitcoin with 3 or 4 pools anyways (see Antpool, ViaBTC, BTC.TOP).

You've read that Jiang Zhuoer is the founder from a news article. So much for your "backed" bullshit.

LTC1BTC = Jiang Zhuoer.... not jihan

have a nice day with yourself readdit reddit scripts that are meaningless & unbacked

This is proof again, that you do not do enough research, but just spew bullshit. LTC1BTC and Antpool are owned by Jihan. The hashrate on both pools has grown exponentially ever since the other miners were about to activate Segwit.

antpool litecoin less than 9%
yawn

The hashrate on both pools from Jihan started severely increasing as soon as the network started going above 70% of the threshold (75% required). Due to this, Segwit is not likely to activate on Segwit anymore (as the combined hashrate of his pools is now >25%). FYI, statements like these are fine when you link up to several people as sources and just verify via recent mining data. It is also likely that LTC is going to test out UASF before Bitcoin, see here: https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/pull/300

lol
proof?
oh. and dont make it a reddit post from some random guy or a tweet from a random guy

With Jihan now actively attacking Litecoin to prevent Segwit from being activated, the statement in the thread title is pretty much disproven. Bitmain is holding two networks hostage. It is time for a revolution.

Do please comment how Blockstream is at fault for LTC too, even though there is zero relevance for that situation.

---

Comedy relief: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9O9bVQq1eY