Topic: @RogerVer lets make a deal. At least 60k, my BTU for your BTC. - page 22. (Read 64924 times)

from experience most who held (from lows to highs) did so because they forgot about btc or ignored it for years LOL

Dynamic block sizes solve block scalability.

Privacy isn't free. There are trade offs.

Seems people forget this when they are used to the concept of the welfare state giving them a free lunch.

You tried telling us that we could have bought 10 million Bitcoins for one cent each. That isn't true. Even "off-book" by the time 10 million Bitcoin existed they were trading for a thousand times more than that.


I've not heard from him for a long time, no. He can PM me here or on reddit if he wants to talk to me.


It wasn't $50k at the time. Anyone wanting to be a VIP member could have easily bought the 50 BTC membership and instantly rebought the 50 BTC at market prices - $5 each or whatever it was back then. It was never about spending $50k to impress a bunch of strangers.

everyone keeps saying "BTU BTU"...BU may be a huge part of the catalyst that gets us to bigger blocks, but if it does, there will be many different compatible implementations (Classic, XT, Core,etc) all taking part.  In fact, there may be a larger kind of 'emergent consensus' coming as there is a new talk planned for May.  We may have >1MB coming, but it won't necessarily be "BTU".  It will be interesting to see how the exchanges treat futures tokens or what the OP would think of that -- i'm pretty sure Ver and Loaded are smart enough to realize these dynamics though for their deal.

I'm still in disbelief about this. He cannot be so tilted, or can he? I'd rather swap my BTC 1:1 with PepeCash tokens than BTU. It has zero prospects at this point.

Reminder that if there's a pool I'm in, would like to know a bit in advance to go for the cold storage.

I guess that's one way to look at it. Satoshi Nakamoto and The Winklevoss Twins own more btc than anyone else and never moved the price to get them. With bitcoin lofty ideals, 1% of bitcoiners hold 99% of the wealth. Funny that they bitch about Wall Street doing the same thing.
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/1-bitcoin-community-controls-99-bitcoin-wealth/

Read this report on the wealth of Satoshi Nakamoto. He's never bought a pizza or anything for that matter.
https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-well-deserved-fortune-of-satoshi-nakamoto/

man, i dunno. it's so hard to put yourself into the mind of someone who was around back then. the level of legitimacy today would seem like 100 years in the future 5 years ago.

and pizza guy paid next to nothing in electricity for those coins so why not try doing something real world with it? i think i read somewhere he mined something like 120,000 coins.

If we view intelligence from a perspective of subjective hindsight we are always going to come up with messed up conclusions. It's ok if you do it on your own, but as a group it makes coherent dialogue impossible.

Ok, maybe, but it was also a transaction made by someone that never believed bitcoin would be worth very much. Just like all the 50 btc VIP forum members. Either that or all the VIP members really did want to spend $50,000 to impress a bunch of strangers.

that's a transaction that deserves everyone's respect. we might not be here if it hadn't happened.

Yes, they were very lucky that bitcoin kept climbing in price and they decided not to sell. I've watched Ver over the years throw 10-20k bitcoins around and that was many years ago, way before he could have wisely invested to grow his stash that large. Not everyone was stupid enough to buy a pizza with thousands of mined bitcoins. It doesn't have to be 10 million, one million is enough. Satoshi is believed to have that many. That was just an extreme example of what you could do today to become ultra wealthy tomorrow.

Many early miners ended up with 10s of thousands of bitcoin. You couldn't possibly be so uninformed that you've never heard of off-book buying so I'm not even going to respond to that one. BTW, Bruno was looking for you. Did you guys ever connect?

Yes they were and thats the whole problem right now.  Ver is claiming he is smart because he was an early adopter.  A quote by Wei Dai comes to mind, who far more attributes such wealth and timing to luck rather than skill/intelligence. Any intelligent (and sufficiently humble) person would.

Being an early adopter is not an indicator of intelligence.

Certainly not. The people who bought or mined BTC in the first years were not taken seriously, they were ridiculed, laughed at and told they were crazy to throw away their time and money. Not even one in a million people understood it, but those who did certainly weren't just lucky.

When Bitcoin was a penny each there weren't 10 million of them. Do you think about what you're saying? It took 4 years for the first 10 million BTC to be mined. The 10 millionth Bitcoin was mined on Sep 22nd 2012 when the price was around $12 per BTC, and that's just the spot price. If you were trying to buy them all you would have pushed the price way higher.

Do you really think that the people who bought BTC cheap and held it all these years through the highs and lows were just "lucky"?

I got 5 on it.

And the fact is, blocksize increases solve the capacity problem, at the exact same scale. Blocksize increases do not change the scale at all.

Big blockers really don't like this fact, which is why they have never dared refute it.

XMR has never meet anywhere near the transaction volumes of BTC. Same goes for all those alts trying to save the day from the comfortable position of being irrelevant. Let's see what happens when they do. XMR node count already rather low, afaik XMR nodes are even heavier to run than bitcoin. I wonder how much the XMR blockchain would weight in the case of it getting BTC-level transaction volume?

Not a XMR hater, just pointing out facts. I think the coin got good tech, but I don't see how it solves the scaling problem at all.

Desastrous picture, like an altcoin pump melting down. The way this fights out feels wrong. When looking at some alts like XMR, there is the concept of variable blocksizes working since years, and very smoothely.

Roger can only lose money with this bet. BUgcoin has no support from the community, and the small amount of nodes that it has are fake and centralized in the hands of few:




All BU nodes are fake as we can see from the graphs and odd behavior (notice how nodes crash due bugs and instantly everything gets patched when there is a patch out), they all come from the same VPS providers, all fake VMs from Roger Ver except a couple idiots that run it too:

https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/?q=/https://btcpop.co%20-%20Free%20People%20-%20Free%20Market%20-%20Free%20Money%20-%20BitcoinUnlimited:1.0.1.1/

And even then it's still far from any support. People are not stupid, they don't gamble with their money on dodgy software.
Core still holds solid 80%+ nodes because people will not trust BUcoin buggy software. Miners are irrelevant and getting bribed to go against the majority. Miners are the security guards of bitcoin, not the engineers. They are paid to do their work, they are too stupid to take protocol-level decisions, and they certainly cannot fork against an huge majority of nodes. They will not fork and if they fork BUcoin gets dumped fast and bad miners get rendered useless via PoW change.

So the outcome is clear. Core wins under 100% of scenarios, BU has 0% survival rate. Facts speak, talk is cheap. If miners are suicidal enough to fork, again, they will be rendered out of the network since they would be de-facto attackers. Merchants will support Core because they will not gamble their business with software that is prone to attacks and loss of funds of their customers. Those that are stupid enough to not support Core will meet bankruptcy soon.

It's a good thing only my rhetoric depended on this particular math example. Corrected, just for you jay