Satoshi will not come out of hiding for a mere Alt coin. I doubt if he will even comment on something like that. He did not discourage any competition and allowed for BIP proposals to be done. That is the design of the system and if there are a consensus in the community for the change, it will have to change.
Bitcoin did not fail, Mike Hearn failed.
Topic: "...then I will have no choice but to declare Bitcoin a failed project" (Read 1278 times)
January 18, 2016, 12:34:26 AM
January 18, 2016, 12:21:48 AM
Remember guise... "Either Blockstream Core, or price through the floor!" -Obama
January 18, 2016, 12:17:03 AM
it is up to each and everyone of us to make bitcoin a success. caring about the rants and proposals of any single representative or spokesperson, regardless of their status or supposed knowledge and history will be the downfall of our ecosystem.
January 17, 2016, 03:02:33 PM
Even as Satoshi Nakamoto interested to return.
I think the price of Bitcoin will explode.
And Bitcoin will appear again in any newspaper or television.
I think the price of Bitcoin will explode.
And Bitcoin will appear again in any newspaper or television.
January 17, 2016, 02:30:57 PM
No, why would he do that? What is with all the negativity?
Thank you for this reminder! I appreciate the kindness and warmth of your tone.
January 17, 2016, 02:28:40 PM
There is absolutely no dnger whatsoever that satoshi is going to come out from whatever rock hes hiding to give any advice on bitcoin now, His reign is over a long time ago and small,medium or large blocks, hes hes not coming back. If ever there was a time for satoshi to come back then he would have done so already. Satoshi will only live on as legend.
January 17, 2016, 02:25:15 PM
It didn't happen.
Someone else faked his message in a shameful attempt to influence what should be a free vote.
There were parts of XT I didn't like, but if a client has the ability to become Bitcoin, it should be a free vote.
Someone else faked his message in a shameful attempt to influence what should be a free vote.
There were parts of XT I didn't like, but if a client has the ability to become Bitcoin, it should be a free vote.
The network can't handle 4MB with SegWit. Are you crazy! Do you want to put security in danger? Grave danger?!?!
No idea what you are referring to.
Personally, Bitcoin Classic seems fine.
Core with 2mb blocks and segwit (effectively 8-10mb capacity) would be ideal.
2mb blocks doesn't mean all the blocks would be at this capacity. If they were, we'd be talking about 4mb. This is just a headroom issue, so its a non-issue.
January 17, 2016, 02:16:17 PM
It didn't happen.
Someone else faked his message in a shameful attempt to influence what should be a free vote.
There were parts of XT I didn't like, but if a client has the ability to become Bitcoin, it should be a free vote.
Someone else faked his message in a shameful attempt to influence what should be a free vote.
There were parts of XT I didn't like, but if a client has the ability to become Bitcoin, it should be a free vote.
The network can't handle 4MB with SegWit. Are you crazy! Do you want to put security in danger? Grave danger?!?!
January 17, 2016, 02:13:41 PM
It didn't happen.
Someone else faked his message in a shameful attempt to influence what should be a free vote.
There were parts of XT I didn't like, but if a client has the ability to become Bitcoin, it should be a free vote.
Someone else faked his message in a shameful attempt to influence what should be a free vote.
There were parts of XT I didn't like, but if a client has the ability to become Bitcoin, it should be a free vote.
January 17, 2016, 01:51:45 PM
Emails from vistomail.com are really from anonymousspeech.com which only allows a free trial period to test its email service. After the trial period's over everyone has to pay them, and if you stop paying your account gets closed. Satoshi might have stopped paying them, and his account could have expired. IF they let people register using an email address from an expired account it could have been easy to register a new account using satoshi's old email address.
Does anonymousspeech.com let people register with secondhand email addresses?
Does anonymousspeech.com let people register with secondhand email addresses?
January 17, 2016, 01:35:01 PM
I believe Satoshi would have had some way to prove his identity considering he knew that his E-Mail's were hacked, so he'd have to initially gain peoples trust to be able to respond.
Another thing that I am not sure about is that was Satoshi's messages PGP signed whenever he used to message anyone long ago? If it was I'm sure he would have used the same thing again.
I feel this would be an impersonation by someone having access to that E-Mail. Bitcoin isn't a failed experiment yet, it's going strong.
Another thing that I am not sure about is that was Satoshi's messages PGP signed whenever he used to message anyone long ago? If it was I'm sure he would have used the same thing again.
I feel this would be an impersonation by someone having access to that E-Mail. Bitcoin isn't a failed experiment yet, it's going strong.
Quote
I don't know, that satoshi will do anything at this moment. And we can't say simply that Bitcoins project is failed and has no choice now to declare something because we dont know the exact future of our Bitcoins.
January 17, 2016, 01:29:50 PM
...
Maybe I am missing something here, but if Bitcoin becomes a failed project, would that not be reflected in the price of BTC?
Whether a "failure" is perceived early (BTC price plunge) or if the failure becomes seen gradually (a persistent loss of faith in BTC, and so price goes down for a long time), a FAILURE would lead to a permanent price decline (over and beyond the normal price volatility).
If BTC is a failure, we will likely know pretty soon by further falling prices. I have no idea if this "Bitcoin Classic" imbroglio will lead to a failure or not.
If people are scared of a Bitcoin Failure, then get out. Cash it in, or buy gold.
Maybe I am missing something here, but if Bitcoin becomes a failed project, would that not be reflected in the price of BTC?
Whether a "failure" is perceived early (BTC price plunge) or if the failure becomes seen gradually (a persistent loss of faith in BTC, and so price goes down for a long time), a FAILURE would lead to a permanent price decline (over and beyond the normal price volatility).
If BTC is a failure, we will likely know pretty soon by further falling prices. I have no idea if this "Bitcoin Classic" imbroglio will lead to a failure or not.
If people are scared of a Bitcoin Failure, then get out. Cash it in, or buy gold.
January 17, 2016, 01:27:09 PM
No, why would he do that? What is with all the negativity?
January 17, 2016, 01:21:20 PM
nothing is a fail about bitcoin, bitcoin do not even need satoshi nor anyone else, so in the remote case satoshi will say the same thing, nothing will happen as usual
Adam back disagrees / is very close in position with what Satoshi (or "Satoshi") wrote:
snip
you think that a high charismatic guy can kill bitcoin at this point, when the miners are practically contorlling it, via mining and via trading(i have reason to believe that they are manipulating the market to increase the value prior the halving, chinese especially)
i'm sure miners will not permit bitcoin to die at least for now... bitcoin is already too big to fail for political reasons
January 17, 2016, 01:12:01 PM
nothing is a fail about bitcoin, bitcoin do not even need satoshi nor anyone else, so in the remote case satoshi will say the same thing, nothing will happen as usual
Adam back disagrees / is very close in position with what Satoshi (or "Satoshi") wrote:
January 17, 2016, 11:09:06 AM
mike should have referred to his own bitcoin-altcoin, xt, that was indeed a failed project
nothing is a fail about bitcoin, bitcoin do not even need satoshi nor anyone else, so in the remote case satoshi will say the same thing, nothing will happen as usual
the tech behind bitcoin is too valuable, to be corrupted by any single entity, it does not matter how powerful it is...
nothing is a fail about bitcoin, bitcoin do not even need satoshi nor anyone else, so in the remote case satoshi will say the same thing, nothing will happen as usual
the tech behind bitcoin is too valuable, to be corrupted by any single entity, it does not matter how powerful it is...
January 17, 2016, 10:47:52 AM
I believe Satoshi would have had some way to prove his identity considering he knew that his E-Mail's were hacked, so he'd have to initially gain peoples trust to be able to respond.
Another thing that I am not sure about is that was Satoshi's messages PGP signed whenever he used to message anyone long ago? If it was I'm sure he would have used the same thing again.
I feel this would be an impersonation by someone having access to that E-Mail. Bitcoin isn't a failed experiment yet, it's going strong.
Another thing that I am not sure about is that was Satoshi's messages PGP signed whenever he used to message anyone long ago? If it was I'm sure he would have used the same thing again.
I feel this would be an impersonation by someone having access to that E-Mail. Bitcoin isn't a failed experiment yet, it's going strong.
January 17, 2016, 10:45:51 AM
Unsigned Message: Thats not satoshi...
satoshi would know that a signed message is needed if he is interested that his opinion is recognized
satoshi would know that a signed message is needed if he is interested that his opinion is recognized
That would make that particular issue settle by his intervention BUT it would reinforce the point that if an authority can impose their opinion by their "status" then the system is broken.
It would create a precedent where in each dispute satoshi must say his opinion with a signed message which would in turn prove that BTC is centralized around his decisions.
you are right.
but your poll suggests that this message is from satoshi. so i am not able to answer it...
The vote in "No" is a superset of "this post is faked". If one believes it's fake, then why would they take the warning seriously?
January 17, 2016, 10:44:11 AM
the vistomail address is no proof.. that theory has been debunked ages ago..
moving on
moving on
January 17, 2016, 10:42:36 AM
Unsigned Message: Thats not satoshi...
satoshi would know that a signed message is needed if he is interested that his opinion is recognized
satoshi would know that a signed message is needed if he is interested that his opinion is recognized
That would make that particular issue settle by his intervention BUT it would reinforce the point that if an authority can impose their opinion by their "status" then the system is broken.
It would create a precedent where in each dispute satoshi must say his opinion with a signed message which would in turn prove that BTC is centralized around his decisions.
you are right.
but your poll suggests that this message is from satoshi. so i am not able to answer it...
i actually believe that:
1) satoshi is pro bigger blocks
2) satoshi wouldnt have a problem with forks (like xt or classic) to solve such issues (aka let the users decide)
i cant prove it though...
Jump to: