Topic: The Rogue Wave - page 4. (Read 1714 times)

Bitcoin doesn't have a problem with consensus. It have always been scammers like Roger and Bitmain who decided to fork off because they were greedy and found a way to easily make hundreds of millions in profit.

Bitcoin is a powerhouse. You're either part of it or go your scammy own way. All forks we have seen chose the scammy way and paid the price for it. Never did the far majority of this economy doubt about what coin to support.

So basically this nutjob is rambling about a version of bitcoin that doesn't even exist.

"My real name?" This is a forum, you pathetic mouth breather.


LOL, I invite anyone to read and find out for themselves. Anyone with basic intelligence can see I picked apart your completely illogical and baseless conspiracy theory. Every time I poked holes in your irrational game theory, you refused to address any of the points I made and proceeded to keep repeating yourself over and over. Your whole method of debate is intellectually dishonest. You merely repeat your baseless, unproven theories ad nauseam then pat yourself on the back for it.

Extremely few nodes exist on the network that would view your chain as valid, yet you keep peddling insane theories like "everyone is secretly running the version I'm clinging to from ages ago that can barely even sync with the network anymore." No, barely anyone is running 0.5.3 or earlier and you have absolutely no data to prove otherwise. You only have your own insane ramblings to offer as "proof." You bizarrely think just because coins are held in legacy addresses that everyone is running 0.5.3 or earlier and therefore wouldn't see your fork as a hard fork. You, of course, are completely fucking wrong, and now just look like a deranged homeless person in the street yelling nonsense at passersby.

Anyone with a basic technical understanding of hard forks knows the vast majority of the network will ignore your stupid fork. This is not only because their nodes would literally ignore the fork, but because very, very few Bitcoin users have any interest in opting into a hard forked chain where miners stole half of the BTC supply. You have no rational game theory that supports this logic. There are no economic actors on the network except for the attacking miners that are interested in playing out your conspiracy theory.

Not only do you not have any network evidence for your assertions, but you haven't begun to establish logically from a game theory perspective why the vast majority of users and BTC holders would fork their own software to join the miner attack on Segwit outputs.

The fact that you speak with authority while peddling complete nonsense is only enough to impress the dumbest of people, the lowest hanging fruit. You vastly overestimate the effects of your attitude on winning arguments.


These irrational ramblings speak for themselves. You just repeat this baseless, unproven bullshit over and over. Why would you expect anyone to keep engaging you? Why do you expect anyone to believe this as truth while simultaneously refusing to address the massive holes poked in your conspiracy theory?

You are not a respectable opponent. Your arguments are laughable, prima facie. No one in their right mind would keep arguing with someone who can be debunked by a small child.


And there you have it, folks. More irrational ramblings from an unhinged lunatic. This shit speaks for itself......

And LOL....."facts?" Holy fuck, if anyone thinks anything you've said is in the remote vicinity of fact then they clearly haven't learned the very basics of logic and epistemology.

You might as well add reptilian aliens to your conspiracy theory too. It wont take away a smidgen of validity at this point.

Anyone with a brain can see you are a) an unhinged lunatic, b) extremely intellectually dishonest, or c) both.

From what I understood, he is referring to the Segwit soft fork from 2017, which would be "bitcoin core" and which addresses start with 3, whereas the old addresses starting with 1 would be the "real bitcoin". However, both adresses formats are bitcoin, because the miner majority signalled Segwit in 2017. Bitcoin is P2P, meaning it need consensus to run. If there is no consensus, we have hard forks, like BCH and BTG for example.

Wtf is this guy rambling about? what is he saying is the "real" bitcoin if it's not core ("the one everyone thinks is the real bitcoin"), BCH or BSV? Is this some shitcoin he came up with or something else? 

I received a rebuttal which I am sharing without taking sides on the issue.


Do you have a proof of that? By the way, I put my real name on my posts. What is your real name? Who is paying you to spread disinformation to fool the readers?


Thanks for linking to the thread where I wiped your face in the facts after you accused me of being a “nutjob”. Readers can read and decide for themselves who is correct, based on the facts that have been presented.


The altcoin is “Core BitcOn” (aka Bitcoin Core developed by Blockstream), because “soft forks” do not exist except in the minds of people who think the game theory of proof-of-work has anything to do with anything other than Nick Szabo’s unforgeable costliness. The original, immutable, 1 MB blocks Satoshi “v0.1” Bitcoin is the and will forever be the only real Bitcoin that has unforgeable costliness. All forks of Bitcoin do not have this property. Core will be forced to hard fork and admit it has been an impostor. And then it will die along with all the other Bitcoin impostor forks such as BSV, BCH and perhaps also LTC. There is only one Bitcoin. And sheepeople love to be manipulated by propaganda and thus separated from their wealth. Cast your pearls at swine and you can join them when pigs get slaughtered. This is not anger. This is just reality. How I wish I could teach sheep to not be fools. As the Bible says, get some salve and apply it on your eyes so you can see more clearly. You have expressed your unsubstantiated derogatory character assassination opinion of me. Whereas, I have written diligently to explain the facts for those who want truth.