"Ok lets rob 50% of people's income via taxes, in order to hire police officers, to protect them from thieves."
"Ok lets steal Satoshi's coins in order to protect it from thieves."
I was just wondering, who would protect you, when there is no police? How much of that TAX is going to the police? Where in the world, do people pay 50% of their income on tax?
How do you compare the two scenarios? Taking 100% of Satoshi's coins, and doing nothing with that? Nope, I do not agree with you that this is a good comparison.
Yes, eliminating Satoshi's coins is a decision that would be made by a dictator, but what if this decision is based on consensus?
In most of EUROPE and other socialist countries.
It's actually well over 80% if you add inflation together and indirect taxes like VAT and others.
Yeah fuck it, you are clearly clueless.
yep your favourite team that want to do it as part of a future pruning feature update (not same as current pruning feature)
Ok show me proof to that, I am tired of you claiming things without showing any actual proof.
And even if what you say is true. I am not a shill, I dont have to agree with everyone all the time.
But I cant really fathom how the core team would be supporting this, where most people there are actually real decentralization advocates.
mimblewimble.
easy term to google
randomly grabbing other peoples transactions without needing their interaction*. to mix them together (part of a coinjoin) and then put the funds back into addresses of who is owed what.
Blockstream mathematician Andrew Poelstra is working on it now.
*the concept is to bypass and strip away the old scripts that check signatures (violating bitcoins current security) and instead replace signatures with a CSV revoke code. where mimblewimble can grab unspents.. coinjoin them and put them into new blocks thus able to prune away old blocks because they no longer contain unspents.
at the moment they are playing around with it on a altcoin but conceiving doing it on bitcoin. basically ruining peoples personal security of their own funds purely so some mimble manager can move funds about at will..
but yea blockstream will say you can trust them to repay people..(facepalm, infact double facepalm)
What if you are just misunderstanding the concept?
Because if this is true, then why are you the only one talking about this.
I only see you constantly criticizing Core, and only you. You are like 1 person against the whole BTC forum.
Is there nobody else here citicizing Core, because if 99.9% of people here agree, and you don't then maybe the problem is not with us, but with you?
remember the devs of 2009-2013 are different to 2013-2017
remember bitcoin core brand took over bitcoin qt - they chose the word 'core' because they want to be at the core(center) of bitcoin. the engine of bitcoin
remember people who now have employment contracts also have employment terms
remember peoples ethics and morals can be tweaked for a price.
so dont trust a dev because of their history.. instead only understand a dev based on current actions.
Then why is nobody else forking the BTC source code and creating alternative clients.
Bitcoin classic to my understanding has only 1 dev.
Where are the other million of enthusiasts who would save Bitcoin with the perfect code that you desire? Are they just sitting on their dick, or maybe they are not even needed.