Topic: /r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda (Read 2308 times)

your out of your mind if you believe:
1. visa got to where it is over night
2. that bitcoin NEEDS to process billions of transactions tonight
3. that bitcoin will be a one world currency for 7 billion people.. tonight or even in a couple decades
3. that halting onchain growth because of fake fears it cant grow.

let me guess if you had kids you would break their knee caps at 6month old out of fear they may walk into a moving car before they are 15. and the only thing you can think of is not letting them walk because a wheelchair with airbags is safer which you can only get if your child is disabled.

bitcoin today is like the internet in 1992, so let me guess if you could time travel to 1997. you would want to kill off the guys that invent skype and activision because video calls and online gaming wont happen the next day of 1997..

You are out of your mind if you think technology will grow naturally with the amount of blocksize needed for mainstream onchain cheap fast transactions while allowing people to run nodes at home.

By the time bitcoin reaches VISA levels, VISA will be lightyears away.

We can't never compete against the expected standards of the average joe onchain, because they are used to the perceived speed of centralized systems.

We can do very moderate blocksize increases and that's about it (if you care about network decentralization that is)

My opinion is that there's no way around it.  Whether these data centers are miners, LN banking hubs, or other forms of delegated power concentrations, the very idea that a trustless cash system must allow in principle, each participant to verify independently the:
1) validity of a right to spend
2) the non-existence of a spending transaction <--- the hard part
3) the non-existence of "counterfeiting" <---- the other hard part

means that a fungible cash system has a burden per user that grows with the size of the system.  This scaling burden per user will give rise to economies of scale by concentrating the "validation" process in "delegated trust authorities", and users preferring to trust some authority instead of suffering the burden himself.  This delegated trust will give power to the owners of those trust authorities, and that's the end of the decentralized, trustless system.

However, this can go almost unnoticed, because these authorities derive their power also from the credibility of the overall system, so in fact, these centralized stake holders have all interest in giving the impression to the user that everything is running as expected.  These centralized entities will be, in fact, the greatest stake holders in the system and will do everything to keep the system running for the users, defend the system and propagate the illusion of a decentralized system.

translation:
"gigabytes by midnight"
"visa by midnight"
"hold bitcoin at 1mb to prevent it growing naturally at a pace that home nodes can cope with over decades, because visa by midnight not naturally in a few decades"
(facepalm)

You have been explained already by a couple people how satoshi's vision is incompatible with the concept of cash, because setting a blocksize big enough to allow for main stream transactions on-chain, would mean the people validating the transactions have the power to censor transactions at will because it would be no longer people running nodes but corporations.

Satoshi was wrong when he wanted datacenters running nodes while calling his project p2p cash.

Some have a huge financial interest in the continued success of bitcoin. The existence of a direct financial interest in advocating a certain direction for bitcoin's growth does not imply that one is being paid by another party.

Newsflash ...

Says whom... the developers? They are not gods. Developers can make mistakes too. Don't assume anyone who opposed Segwit is a bad actor. Not everyone is a sheep that simply follows thy leader to doom. Some are actually capable of using their own intelligence to decide for themselves whether segwit is good for bitcoin or not.

I think its interesting that recently I was in the Dev&Tech section making the obvious point that SW UASF would cause a network split if not backed by majority hashpower,
and you have Gmax and Achow trolling me, playing semantic games... trying to somehow argue it.   (You can't make this stuff up)

Gmax moderates that along with achow.
i have had many discussions about technical flaws which funnily enough months later they end up patching or doing work arounds to cover up but not admit to.. but they happily delete my posts

i guess you missed the whole blockstream censors all negatives about them
hint:


funny part is darkbot and others do not reply in connection to the content. but just poke the bear with "shill" replies to divert the discussion away from the content

Hey I've been away for a while... but apparently notorious UnlimitedCoin trolls jonald_fyookball and franky1 are as active as always.

This tells us that Bitcoin Judas Roger Ver still has funds left to pay his shills.

Now they go as far as justifying the obviously malicious integration of a backdoor into Bitmain hardware. I would say, that's definitely a new quality that goes way beyond shilling. It's more like endorsing fraud.

I think it's about time that we, as a community, take proper action against such behavior. A permaban is long overdue!

ya.ya.yo!

Why oh why i never see Franky1 in the Development & Technical Discussion section if you know so much about this topic? You're just a fake copy/paste noob try to troll people who doesn't know much about it.

Gmaxx is active there so you can have youre debat with him...Oh no you aint got the balls for it right? It's much easier to troll!

Paid shill Franky1!

what you dont realise is that i and many others dont need to be paid.

i hold bitcoin from the earlier times.
i am not expressing my opinion to earn an income. i am doing it because i care about my hoard and future. i dont even look at the bitcoin price because even that is just temporary drama to me. i care about the long term viability of the bitcoin network as a diverse decentralised peer network, not a cludgy cesspit with a blockstream dominant tier network

my rationale about antbleed is that their firmware check server doesnt respond, and for months has not been used for anything malicious. and most pools are behind firewalls anyway. if pools were to become malicious all they would be doing is hurting themselves. directly and indirectly

secondly my rationale is that for months nothing has happened but now that segwit supporters are getting very desperate to find excuses to kill off pools to fake a 95% activationof the cludgy tier network, by purely rejecting blocks based on version number.. is a bigger threat because that is more likely to happen than all the if's and maybe's of antpool shooting themselves in their own foot using antbleed

thirdly i will emphasis the last point. shouting out a sudden 'pools are bad because they 'could' shutdown some pools, so segwit/uasf 'must' shut down some pools is hypocrisy in its finest. thats like saying there could be a nuclear war, so america must start a nuclear war.
come on think logically about the mindset of some people "omg X could kill 30% so we must kill 70%" rathre than actually listening to the 70%
its even funny that things have got so desparate that some are saying that 70% are all one man.. (illogical facepalm)

lastly. if segwit supporters want to go down the kill 70% route(which is not 1 person by th way).. this can only be done via a node consensus. then atleast use that opportunity to actually recode segwit as a 1 merkle version where there is just a single block parameter of 4mb that both native and segwit can sit in and include other features the community want and can unite everyone

not simply push out another version that has one small temporary purpose just to allow in something else that only has temporal positive features "at best" but a bigger negative, more long term issues it can and will cause.

now try to reply about my context above without just screaming any thing that amounts to 'typical shill response' or 'wrong because cant find reason but your a shill'  because thats just a whistle in the wind response. P.S dont reply about me presuming your just going to scream something about shilling like your playing the victim card. again whistles in the wind.
reply about the context of the black writing not this grey writing

No. It is non nonsensical to ask for evidence for a claim that nobody has ever made.

1) Appeal to authority.
2) BU has nothing to do with Satoshi's vision.

Read this: https://github.com/BitcoinUnlimited/BitcoinUnlimited/issues/485. Gmaxwell opened up an issue regarding a serious problem in their code; look how unprofessional the response i.e. the BTU team is.

Wouldn't doubt that Ver and Wu have already put out a ton of money in bribes in order to try to discredit the entire claim and to push it off, I highly doubt anything they do is going to fix it, and I do hope they burn for all of this and everything else they've done. They've practically held Bitcoin hostage in an attempt to stop Segwit so Wu can still make more money of AsicBoost being able to run and work.

It's a bunch of fucking bullshit but what can you do about it, all we can do is sit here and try to show people the facts. Maybe if people don't buy Wu's stuff it'll kill him slowly. WHO KNOWS

I believe in Satoshi's vision.  Hate me for it if you want, I don't care

I know it has to be hard to keep up with all your posting “jobs” and all but I stated I’m against UASF or a PoW change unless it’s a last resort. I do not want to see a chain split unless there is no way around it. I want progress not stagnation.

Core’s roadmap with SegWit is the best way forward. It is only being blocked due to some bad actors wanting to keep their secret advantage intact. Jihan Wu himself has acknowledged this. He likes SegWit but does not want it for reasons he cannot justify (Secret advantage).

You are constantly defending bitmain, jihan, big blocks and bashing core with a single-minded obsessiveness, like all day long, every day. No one in their right mind would be on Bitcointalk that many hours a day, saying the same shit over and over again without it being a job.
 
You and jonald are the two biggest shills on this forum for those reasons. I only call people shills who appear to be shills, like you two. If you are not being paid to do this, then you must have something wrong psychologically.

No one spends that amount of time and effort without being paid to do so. So yes, a shill is a shill is a shill and I'll continue to call your brethren out.

That is the whole point of being here, trying to get some (whatever).
This is what happens when you rush in developing a world class crypto currency without properly thinking through everything and cover every aspect.
I know as a fact that many people take some stuff and reverse engineer it and then start copying the design, now how is it that miners with Antminer ASICs are unable to do the same?
Bitmain having more at stakes here so remotely killing miners makes no sense, unless they no longer can mine with ASICboost advantage and effectively can target every antminer not mining BU blocks which then again I'm sure someone will find a way to stop that.
People are reverse engineering the most advanced technologies such as missiles/ drones/ laser guided systems/ radar evasion, I'm sure they can handle this one. but for now let them mine covertly as much as they can only thing we can do as community is to hold to our coins as long as possible and not fall for $1300/ $1500 prices as whales will be the ones to profit more than others when we hit $2500+ in near future.

First it was ASICBOOST and now Antbleed this chinese miner mafia will really do everything they can to take control of bitcoin.
And now they're trying to divert the attention towards them into blaming the Core devs into attacking their BUggy network. seriously are they really that desperate?

funny part is im writing this on a tablet in a hotel looking over a beach. sometimes i write on a plane. sometime in a taxi. just about everywhere apart from a basement

but if you look at my post history, i waffle details and things that get people thinking.
if you want to do a tally of how many times feindcoin uses the word shill vs how many times i only respond about race or news preference before today. you will see who shouts out the empty replies more.

but have a nice day