Topic: Long term advance notice! - page 7. (Read 3720 times)

There is not a single iota of logic or evidence that proves your point in those useless, rambling posts. Chock full of retarded assumptions with no basis like:


You are laughably dumb if you eat up this sort unproven illogical garbage. These posts are nothing but empty opinions from people who are obviously completely ignorant of the economic incentives.


You're a nutjob, no disclaimer required. Nobody cares about your "research" because quite obviously you have nothing to show for it besides some laughably stupid Steemit links.


"Oh yeah, derp derp, 50% coins in Segwit addresses? Must be time to fork to that chain nobody is going to use where we steal everyone's coins! Derp derp!" Super convincing game theory. We're all very impressed with you. LOL.

You idiots haven't even bothered to discuss mining incentives as pertaining to actual users, post-fork. You've based this entire absurd theory on mining rewards at existing prices! That's beyond absurd! Miners on your shitcoin won't be mining billions in value. Who is going to put bids on exchanges for that shitcoin? It would be dumped to hell immediately and become incredibly unprofitable to mine.

Somehow you've convinced yourself that airdropping coins to legacy addresses is going to create demand for your coin. Now why would that be? If Bcash taught us anything, airdrops are for dumping.


How is your shitcoin immutable? You're proposing a hard fork where miners steal outputs from users on the original fork. That's the complete opposite of immutable.

What you're proposing is yet another Bitcoin hard fork spinoff. What makes you think users would uninstall their Bitcoin software to install the miners fork? Half the economy with Segwit outputs is obviously strongly opposed to that. Everyone else has a strong interest in a resolution where miners don't prove Bitcoin doesn't work by stealing everyone's money. All user incentives, both long term and short, point to heavy opposition to the miners fork.

Bitcoin users can wait days, weeks or longer while miners spend endless millions of dollars attacking Bitcoin and mining their worthless shitcoin chain. All users have to do is wait. Slow block times aren't going to convince Bitcoin users to go against their interests. Miners are the ones who will be squeezed financially into calling the attack off and incentivized to return to the chain where users actually are.


Sounds really convincing!

When are you actually going to say something that might prove your point?



No they won't. Nobody would ever put bids up for this useless shitcoin. There will be zero bid liquidity on exchanges, zero OTC liquidity. In one move, these miners will have publicly destroyed the entire use case for their coin. It doesn't matter how big the mining rewards are since the coins will be worthless at market.

Which is why miners will never engage in this.



Why would your shitcoin be immune? Investors are going to conclude that POW doesn't work.

This is the most incredible thing about your theory. You believe investors are going to flock to the very dishonest miners who just robbed them. The truth is, they would dump your shitcoin too, especially since it was just airdropped.

Not to mention that miners will control half the supply on fork day. LOL. Yeah, really attractive for investors! Where can I line up to buy some?

why would mining "Satoshi’s v0.5.3 protocol" be so much more profitable? that requires mining rewards to have value but the value of these mining rewards would plummet to zero. there would be zero market demand and the airdrop to standard address users would be dumped into any existing bids. (if exchanges even listed this shitcoin at all)

why would anyone want to buy this coin or run its software? it's a fork based on stealing users money. just because it has some hash rate? that won't last long.

It's simpler than that. The vast majority of nodes (and therefore users) would simply ignore such a theft. He is talking about miners attempting to steal outputs going back to the P2SH fork in 2012, not just Segwit. This is in violation of consensus rules at the node level going back years. There are hardly any nodes left on the network that would view the miners' fork as valid. Even if we're just talking about hard forking to violate Segwit, 80% of reachable nodes already enforce Segwit at this time. So the fork would simply be ignored by the Bitcoin network.

Once miners realize no one's coming and they are wasting millions of dollars mining a worthless chain, they will return to the legacy chain. There would be temporarily slower block times on the legacy chain but that's about it.

I don't think miners would risk such an obvious blunder.

Its interesting in the way that it could lead to a PoS version of bitcoin. If the miners betray the trust of users, and steal funds from Segwit adresses, the devs will fork it, rollback the theft, and use LN to validate blocks, since LN is dependable on Segwit. This would lead to a PoS version of bitcoin.

On the other hand, we would have the Legacy mainchain keeping the same value of the forked one, due to being the longest chain in a PoW perspective (LN came only in 2017), which was not the case with BCH (which had less hashrate when it forked).

But Im probably wrong, since I dont know all the technicals about it.

No it's not. He seems like a nutjob. It's incredible that anyone is still going on about an "anyone-can-spend" attack. He obviously deeply misunderstands the incentives at work in Bitcoin.

No one cares what miners want; they will simply follow what users want. The lead-up to the Segwit fork proved that much. If miners switch to a fork where they steal everyone's coins going back 2012, nobody is going to switch to the miner's fork, LOL. Why would they? Clearly these are dishonest miners who are useless in securing a protocol.

Again, miners follow users, not the other way around. Without users, there are no transaction fees and no speculative value based on future usage. Miners will be spending massive amounts mining a completely worthless chain.

Just like they fell in line with Segwit activation, they will quickly migrate back to the "Core" chain where the vast majority of users will be. No, a bit of temporary congestion and slower block times won't cause anyone to fork to a chain where the protocol incentives obviously don't work to keep miners honest.

If the attack succeeded (LOL) it would only succeed in destroying trust in all the forks, and all of crypto.

Through the main Core interface it by default generates an address starting with a 3 but can check a box to generate a bc1 address. I don't see an option anyhere that allows you to generate a legacy format address. I'm not sure if there is a certain command that you can tap into to generate a legacy address, but you can always install a pre Segwit version of core that can be found here; https://bitcoin.org/bin/

Bitcoin Core clients are backwards compatible so you're most likely good to go, the only question is how safe are the older versions today.... If that's not an option then there is Electrum that you can use. They allow you to choose which address format to use.

He plans to sell, there are people waiting to buy. This was 6 months ago, and still price is doubled since that time. One of his announcements without realization, that speaks a lot about him. I didnt trust that he is Satoshi from the start, with his actions he just proves that more and more. i dont understand how his bsv coin still lives and who is using it.

FUD carrier, nonsense.

This message from Shelby is very interesting. The issue is even more complex than what I believe it was.

The recent versions of the core wallet are only distributing adresses starting with 3. Do anyone know if its possible to generate adresses starting with 1? Most of my stash is on those old "legacy" adresses, but I dont know if any fractions that I move from adresses starting with 3 to these old adresses would be valid (in face of what Shelby explained, assuming its true). Any suggestions?