[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance


View post   

File: 18 KB, 648x388, roger_ver.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11905026 No.11905026 [Reply] [Original]

So.. Why exactly is he not on Craig's team?

>> No.11905036

roger just wants tokens, he will come around

>> No.11905039

>>11905026
because craig is an arrogant cuck that insults everyone

>> No.11905046

>>11905026
because he's not smart enough to make the cut, he's just a cunt that got lucky

>> No.11905047

Because BCH is his baby and he got paidoff by Bitmain to follow Jihan's plans. Roger probably gets a cut of the IPO money.

>> No.11905048

>>11905026
>come join our side rogerboy, and you won't get in trouble
>o-o-okay...

>> No.11905052

Wright has claimed to have a PhD in computer science from Charles Sturt University on his LinkedIn profile. But the university told Forbes that it only awarded him two master's degrees and not a doctorate.

>> No.11905054

two idiots that are made for each other, thought they mattered and had any control over their little worlds, and were put in their place by a chink, who himself was put in his place by the entire bitcoin community

>> No.11905058

>>11905036
Lmao. Read that in Craig's voice. I thin he likes Rodguh. Perhaps they're lovers.

>> No.11905153

There are a lot of obnoxious pricks in crypto, but Craig is just the Alpha Prick.

That's why beta pricks like Roger, Greg, Adam, Oliver or Samson just can't cope with him.

>> No.11905279

>>11905047
>Because BCH is his baby and he got paidoff by Bitmain to follow Jihan's plans. Roger probably gets a cut of the IPO money.
He must have some huge financial interest in bitmain, I have never been able to work out the details, he may own a portion via shell companies and trusts.

>> No.11905294

Americucks cant compete with a chadstralian

>> No.11905307

>>11905052
Ausfag here, Charles Sturt is a shit-tier university.

What really happened between Roger and CSW: Roger tried to push CSW as Satoshi to give BCH more credibility as to being the true Bitcoin (didn't have to, it always was the real BTC once Blockstream happened to Core), CSW bid his time, built up a presence and recognition and used Roger's own scheme against him.

Aussies are the Jews of the Pacific.

>> No.11905313
File: 204 KB, 567x567, 1517023994490.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11905313

>>11905294
he renounced his citizenship and ins't allowed back anyway.

>> No.11905322
File: 72 KB, 788x685, 307.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11905322

>>11905026
There's literally no-one on Craig's team except for a group of paid trolls on /biz/.
And a few people /biz/-tards who only like Craig because he's a fellow autist.
All of the ecosystem supports ABC, but feel free to be a retard and pump the SV price more, when Roger sells he'll have more $ to invest in BCH development.

>> No.11905374

>>11905322
>All of the ecosystem supports ABC
the ecosystem consists of myopic developers who prefer to do pointless optimizations for shits and giggles than to push the project forward in any real capacity.

>> No.11905484

>>11905322
>All of the ecosystem supports ABC
More like all the platforms Roger has a financial stake in because he funded them when they were tiny startups.

>> No.11905511

>>11905036
Hi Craig Bruh

>> No.11905552

>>11905026
Why would a based ancap that bought into the original world changing vision for bitcoin defect to handing control over to a rank incompetent fraud who instead wants to implement a provably failed roadmap and literally operate the entire chain from his corporate centralised 100k+ nodes that can't even process 64 mb blocks because the stupid motherfucker doesn't understand the software is the problem? They're neither ideologically nor competence aligned.

>> No.11905563
File: 273 KB, 1809x796, 1543182110718.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11905563

>>11905054
Sad fucking corecuck boomers still larping like they're not a laughing stock.

>> No.11905629

>>11905552
Roger just spent the last three years claiming BTC could have scaled to huge 1gb+ blocks and replace visa, which is it?

>> No.11905655

>>11905552
>>11905563
Redpill is bitter. Swallow it.

>> No.11905658
File: 7 KB, 250x337, 1543147384078.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11905658

>>11905629
> cars can go really fast
> why can't my yugo loaded with every goat I've ever fucked break the sound barrier?
tfw

>> No.11905767

>>11905658
Roger has explicitly stated there was no reason BTC couldn't scale simply by increasing the blocksize and that blocksize limits were only there to benefit blockstream, what changed?

>> No.11905856
File: 445 KB, 2778x1521, fZJeIG6.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11905856

>>11905767
> simply
Citation needed.
Nothing changed, but scaling on chain from a project that was designed by the initial developers to never handle greater than a constant throughput of 10mb blocks requires actual software engineering work. Ignorantly upping the limits and trying to throw hardware at the problem solves absolutely nothing, and you have to be a complete brainlet when it comes to technology not to get this.
The science is all laid out very clearly here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SJm2ep3X_M
Everybody told SV that they would run into these problems if they did what they ignorantly did anyway, and that's exactly what happened.
I'm no fan of splits, but there's no saving stupid people from themselves, if they want to secede and do something stupid, you have to let them, if they threaten war to try and make you come with them, you take defensive measures, which was done, and they lost that battle too.

>> No.11905957

>>11905374
> myopic developers who prefer to do pointless optimizations for shits and giggles than to push the project forward in any real capacity
Have still accomplished infinitely more than Craig ever has
>>11905484
>More like all the platforms Roger has a financial stake in because he funded them when they were tiny startups.
Well, there's hundreds of them and Craig has yet to deliver something. So yeah

>> No.11906023

>>11905374
Here's what happens when you don't "do pointless optimisations" >>11905856
They're not fucking pointless, they're required to fix the chaotic wreck core left the software in. SV supporters simply don't understand this because of the fake core 1mb limit, they think they're being lied to again, well, you're not, look at that graph and understand it.

>> No.11906081

>>11905026
It's all a theater to pump and dump another fork and leave you holding their bags. They only want more BTC.

>> No.11906095
File: 100 KB, 900x905, 1541549597188.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906095

>>11906081
Only low iq boomer npcs want BTC >>11905563
. SV is unironically better than it.

>> No.11906100

>>11906081
Noone wants BTC. You can't even use it without worrying about network congestion.
Buy NANO. No retarded miners, no inflation

>> No.11906114
File: 991 KB, 500x281, patrician.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906114

>>11906100
> NANO
well done, early days and not guaranteed but promising indeed.

>> No.11906118

>>11905856
>Citation needed.
Here's a 20 min video of him rambling about how it can exceed visa on current hardware and software. There's a near endless amount of sources if I look more. I think the math works out to around 600mb per block for what he was suggesting here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ipgwl7-K6o

>> No.11906147
File: 58 KB, 320x553, II62IJV.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906147

>>11906118
I've seen that video before. He doesn't say anything about the software never needing to be modified.
Nobody outside sad boomer corecucks are saying the hardware is inadequate. The demands at the physical level of the task is not the problem. It's that the software is inadequate. Watch the previous video. It goes into the exact problems with the node implementation, mostly that it is single core, not optimised for parallelism at all, has bad locking strategies, and extra pieces in the architecture to force it to go slowly.
We're absolutely on the same page that the goal is both possible and desirable, SV supporters are simply taking the wrong path to get there, whether by malice or ignorance, and that's unfortunate because now it's resulted in a damaging split. But consider the fact that everything everyone on the other side of the split said would happen when SV did what they planned on doing did indeed happen, and worse.

>> No.11906183

>>11906118
>>11906147
Found the exact place where he is talking about software optimisation specifically. https://youtu.be/5Ipgwl7-K6o?t=893 it is not at all "everything is fine just increase the block size limit and it's done"

>> No.11906198

>>11906147
>I've seen that video before. He doesn't say anything about the software never needing to be modified.
How ridiculous, you're claiming his video where he claims bitcoin can easily scale to visa levels doesn't actually means he thinks it can scale as he said because there are software issues he knows about but for some reason completely omitted?

>> No.11906216

>>11906198
He didn't omit them, you just didn't actually watch or understand it. This is the problem with you SV supporters, you don't think deep enough, slow down and actually analyse what's going on, you already fucked up chronically in the real world, if it weren't for that I probably actually would've held my BSV as a hedge against ABC/BU/XT failure. But it made it abundantly clear that BSV is incompetent.

>> No.11906221

>>11906183
I have had literal bitcoin.com employees telling me on twitter all you need to do is buy a 10tb HDD and 1gb+ blocks are fine right now. There's literally over three years of videos of him claiming huge blocks were possible right now, you're being ridiculous, I'll find more when I have time to waste.

>> No.11906233

>>11905856
>that graph
Yikes.

This is what happens when you follow personalities around instead of examining the technical details. SV will die horribly because of this.

>> No.11906237

>>11906221
Once again, that's *hardware*. And yes, there are no hardware problems, that's well established.
Your own citation proves that the present software implementation is flatly inadequate to the task. Look for alternatives all you like, and you will find the same result. The software needs to be optimised.
What on earth is even wrong with that? Why do you find it so terrifying? It's software, you fucking fix it, get it to where everyone agrees it can and should be, and move on. Why would you insist on using demonstrably inadequate software because you want to pretend it isn't? What is going on inside your head?

>> No.11906293

>>11906237
>What on earth is even wrong with that? Why do you find it so terrifying? It's software, you fucking fix it, get it to where everyone agrees it can and should be, and move on.
If they know how to fix it why exactly haven't ABC or unlimited fixed it over the years? Roger was tweeting only weeks ago about how BCH can handle 32mb of TX etc. Now you're saying 10mb is the limit? It's not even a substantial increase over BTC with segwit.

>> No.11906329

>>11906293
10mb is the limit *prior to the fucking changes that ABC just implemented* which is why Roger is tweeing about how BCH can handle 32mb of TX now, which is proven in actual stress tests, and given BSV rejected those changes that ABC just implemented, it's stuck at 10mb.
This is all very fucking simple, let me sum it up as basic as possible; ABC did the right thing, and increased their on chain throughput in the read world as a result to 32mb, BSV did the wrong thing, BSV rejected the right thing, now BSV is stuck on the previous core throughput limit of 10mb despite raising a limit they can't actually hit to 128mb.
Fixing it is exactly what the rest of the ecosystem except BSV is actually doing. Consider that you may well be an unwitting pawn in a cats paw play from core to try and make the point that the original promises of BCH are unrealistic by naively trying to raise the block limit without making the necessary software optimisations and as a result looking like an idiot and also validating the core narrative that it's impossible for POW blockchains to get significant scale on chain, period. Whether this is true or not irrelevant to the fact that BSV *does not work*.

>> No.11906350
File: 259 KB, 800x1041, 1_2VzrobU9n1crVfrGkIGhLg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906350

>>11906293
And before you say "well permanent 32mb limit wasn't the plan either" it's still not the fucking plan, pic related.

>> No.11906434
File: 61 KB, 1010x613, rogercrazed.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906434

>>11906329
>BSV rejected the right thing, now BSV is stuck on the previous core throughput limit of 10mb despite raising a limit they can't actually hit to 128mb.
Watched them mine a bunch of 32mb and one 64mb block the last week, you're just outright lying again. That's not to say I'm convinced SV can deliver their claims, I'm just tired of the constant lies from BCH/BAB people.

>> No.11906447
File: 16 KB, 474x316, saywhat.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906447

>>11906434
That's exactly what the fucking graph shows you brainlet fucktard, christ. The block size doesn't *matter*. It is the sustained throughput that matters. Read the fucking graph and understand it, I'm done explaining shit to your retarded fucking ass.

>> No.11906458

>>11906350
Stuff that isn't in the whitepaper.png
Segwit, any off chain or significant additions were labeled as heresy only weeks ago, again what happened to the years of screeching that people just needed to stick to the whitepaper and anything else isn't bitcoin?

>> No.11906478
File: 585 KB, 977x595, onemeggregcswpals.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906478

>>11906329
> cats paw play from core to try and make the point that the original promises of BCH are unrealistic by naively trying to raise the block limit without making the necessary software optimisations and as a result looking like an idiot and also validating the core narrative that it's impossible for POW blockchains to get significant scale on chain, period
this desu. This is all BSV is and it ain't even fuckin subtle senpai

>> No.11906482

>>11906458
dude ur a fuckin tard, none of that contradicts the white paper, it just implements it properly.

>> No.11906487

>>11906447
>That's exactly what the fucking graph shows you brainlet fucktard, christ. The block size doesn't *matter*. It is the sustained throughput that matters. Read the fucking graph and understand it, I'm done explaining shit to your retarded fucking ass.
Now it's sustained average blocksize you're talking about? BCH and ABC certainly never delivered anything in that regard ANTpool mostly mines empty blocks leaving it with even less capacity than BTC.

>> No.11906496

>>11906482
>dude ur a fuckin tard, none of that contradicts the white paper, it just implements it properly.
Which part of the whitepaper is wormhole cash in?

>> No.11906509
File: 328 KB, 1396x607, osnXXXw.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906509

>>11906487
lol, and the truth comes out, it's just another coretard larping as something different.

>> No.11906518

>>11906496
since it's just a wallet and application layer level functionality, none, I'd say. but you're clearly just a core shill and I'm not really up for wasting time on you either go eat a dick.

>> No.11906544
File: 135 KB, 563x800, bitcoinABC.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906544

>>11906509
>everyone that contradicts Roger is a core conspirator!
I really hope most of you people are actual shills and not really this stupid.

>> No.11906562
File: 64 KB, 710x759, rogerroger.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906562

>>11906482
>>11906509
>>11906518
Not much point getting unique post IDs to shill when your writing style is a dead give away. No capitalization and two commas per post.

>> No.11906572

>>11906544
No, people can tell you're a shill because you started out naively pushing for sv and then slowly morphed into shilling for core in an obvious way. Nothing to do with the stuff you're against. It's the stuff you're for, and you're a typical core shill.

>> No.11906578

>>11906562
lol now stylometry on sub sentence snippets to designate everyone who disagrees with you as a roger shill? Christ you're pathetic.

>> No.11906634

>>11906572
>>11906578
>Hey guys I use capital letters now, look how individual I am!

>> No.11906658
File: 47 KB, 500x500, 1541574045195.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906658

>>11906634
Hire better shills dragon's den. Your game is slipping and I'm bored with the fodder you're sending these days.

>> No.11906667

so what shold i buy now BSV or BAB

>> No.11906700
File: 335 KB, 745x640, satoshi.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906700

>>11905026
because of feelings. it's hands down craigs fault, he handles other people extremely poorly. however roger also picked a side before the hashwar had even started, craig didn't declare roger his "enemy" until roger announced that bitcoin.com would split coins deliberately.

i wish roger and craig was on the same team again. their end goals do align: censorship-resistant global money. roger on-boards people that craig can't reach and vice versa, it was the absolute perfect combination.

i no longer think abc can become world money however i still think sv needs people like roger to cover all walks of life.

>> No.11906717

So, abcucks want to optimise on the protocol level. SV wants to not touch the protocol, and focus on improving the software that serves it. given that there's a lot of room for improvements there, and adoptions relies on the landscape not changing every 5 minutes, it seems fair to focus on non-userspace elements first and foremost.
ABC => myopia and disregard for users
SV => pragmatic and visibly experienced in the software development process.

>> No.11906732

>>11906700
I'm not surprised he has low people skills I'm surprised he's low IQ. Doesn't sound likely that someone like that would come up with this.

>> No.11906808
File: 887 KB, 2560x1440, lotr Ungoliant vs Morgoth cropped.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906808

>>11906350
something i find really strange is "fee improvements (cheaper transactions)". if you just make nodes relay and accept fees below 1 byte/sat then bam, you're done. no need to put such a small thing on the roadmap.

also think "fractional satoshis (fees low forever)" is really strange. before that would even become viable the dust limit must first be removed (546 satoshis). that alone would improve things a lot. and right now today the minimum fee is 1 sat per the whole transaction. not per byte. so if you make a 300 byte transaction you can pay 0.00334 sat/byte today, if the tx is 600 bytes you only pay 0.00167 sat/byte. when it's already that cheap it's strange to group "fractional satoshis" together with "(fees low forever)".

the integer that holds the number of satoshis transferred today can hold a number 1000 times larger than the current max. so it is possible to make 1 satoshi dividable into 1000 "subsatoshis". however this change is enormous and would require updates to all existing software and hardware, including for example deployed bitcoin ATMs in random cities. it's planned big changes like this that scares the businesses away. and you'd have to wonder if it's worth it, if someone ever needs to pay half a satoshi then maybe a secondary crypto for minor payments would be better or some kind of smart contract solution. though i suppose if they can change the protocol freely they can just add another integer besides the satoshi integer to keep track of subsatoshis, if that tx can be made compatible with existing systems it would be fine (via some kind of segwit-esque trick maybe)

still i think it's a strange roadmap. "new transaction format (more capable more compact)" should be before fractional satoshis and it should have already been done as early as possible since it breaks everything up until that day

>> No.11906814
File: 3.58 MB, 1251x1421, 1524074059659.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906814

>>11906717
>abcucks want to optimise on the protocol level
Correct. Current-day hardware cannot process blocks bigger than 20MB without optimizations.
SV mined a fake 64 block (aka, saved time on propagations), all their miners are on a local network, and it still took it more than an hour to propagate. At the moment, SV is struggling with every block bigger than 5MB because they decided against using the optimizations.
BU, had better results with Gigabyte blocks on a distributed worldwide network with average-power PC-s than SV did with 64mb on their local network.

>> No.11906844

>>11906700
>i wish roger and craig was on the same team again. their end goals do align: censorship-resistant global money.
They don't align, roger wants censorship resistant money to do illegal things with that somehow scales infinitely and has the features of ethereum.

CSW claims he wants to avoid it being used for illicit activities as large blocks will require datacenters and infrastructure large governments could close down. He claims the primary purpose is to provide sound currency that isn't subject to debasement by politicians and to increase efficiency of trade.

>> No.11906847
File: 551 KB, 900x2030, pet.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906847

>>11906814
current (SV) verification process can be made multi-threaded and it would out-perform CTOR because the threads won't need to talk to each other so much. graphene also works on SV, CTOR only improves it by 5-10% since you don't need to transfer tx ordering in a block

>> No.11906852

>>11906717
>ABC => myopia and disregard for users
I haven't seen such mindless slogan since the communist era. ABC are working on a pragmatic approach to finalized software, that's ready to lock the protocol level.
The entire ecosystem is using ABC, with SV only being used by companies, funded by SV.
So much for "disregard for users".
>SV => pragmatic and visibly experienced in the software development process.
Top kek.
All their software is a fork of ABC + 10 lines of code. Those 10 lines of code contained 4 critical bugs.
They failed to even properly configure their miners during the stress test. Couldn't produce blocks larger than 2mb for the first 6 hours, until randoms on the forums told them how to properly configure an ABC (sv) node.
Nakasendo is such a mess they just deleted it from their github.
They've had 60+ devs (CSW's own words) for years and all they've got to show for it are 10 lines of code, containing 4 critical bugs, and inability to even copy+paste ABC code properly.
So much for "visible experience".

>> No.11906862

>>11906700
Not Satoshi. He's just a tard. And people don't have a problem with him because he lacks people skills. It's because he's incompetent and talks nothing but bullshit.

>> No.11906875
File: 351 KB, 800x800, peach5.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906875

>>11906844
roger's goal is censorship-resistant borderless money and craig's goal is censorship-resistant borderless money.

craig makes sure it's legal and roger can keep promoting economical freedom and rage against the machine. what roger want the system to be used for is a side-effect that comes from craig's system that still works within the law, their end goals (global money) still aligns regardless of what purpose they want from the system.

>>11906862
read his articles and watch his presentations. ignore his tweets and emails that he makes just for fun.

>> No.11906900

>>11906844
> require datacenters and infrastructure large governments could close down. He claims the primary purpose is to provide sound currency that isn't subject to debasement by politicians
Hey shill you might not want to contradict yourself so close together like this. It makes you look even more stupid than you already do.

>> No.11906919
File: 48 KB, 1190x219, 1542553741254.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906919

>>11906875
I have. That's how I know he is a tard. He plagiarizes and fucks things up in subtle ways that make it clear he has no idea what he's fucking talking about. His presentations on proof of burn for example demonstrates he doesn't know how checksums in addresses work, despite supposedly creating the spec. He is nothing but an incompetent blowhard conman.

>> No.11906946

>>11906852
>ABC are working on a pragmatic approach to finalized software, that's ready to lock the protocol level
So they want to change the protocol, agreed.
>All their software is a fork of ABC + 10 lines of code
>more code = better
just no

>> No.11906959
File: 229 KB, 1485x1114, one last hug.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11906959

>>11906919
well at least then you just don't repeat what everybody else says but you still came to the wrong conclusion.

>> No.11906973

>>11906847
That's flat wrong re parallelisation. If you ha e a set with a fixed order it is much easier to parallelise processing of it rather than arbitrary. And given sv have proven they can't engineer their way out of a paper bag what does it even matter? They're incompetent. And lastly, 10 percent of terabyte blocks is a lot. Everyone wants the protocol locked down asap so it can be safely built on long term, given that it's necessary to finalize the consensus layer changes as fast as possible rather than when they're required. Look how much hell this amount of progress has raised. Very powerful interests are fundamentally opposed to a tamper and censor proof currency at world scale completely outside the control of the state and they are pushing back hard.

>> No.11906983

>>11906959
Not an argument. Go on being conned all you like. It doesn't make any difference at all.

>> No.11907030
File: 22 KB, 428x613, thin door.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11907030

>>11906983
im not arguing with you my friend

>>11906973
ABC: split block for each thread -> constantly keep bumping into unknown UTXOs -> need to ask all other threads if they have seen the parent
SV: split block for each thread -> sometimes bump into a unknown UTXO -> need to ask only the threads that handle prior parts of the block

>> No.11907071
File: 761 KB, 1803x756, hashwar.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11907071

>> No.11907086

>>11907030
Wrong. The way you do it in both is just keep a fast bloom filter of the tx inputs you're processing and when you have a collision put it in a process later queue in the order it was discovered. The vast bulk of validation can be handled in massively parallel fashion. I'm not even going to discuss it more than that, I get paid hundreds of thousands a year to design this stuff and given the way SV has operated they've completely alienated me and everyone like me with their stupidity and parochialism.
And they don't have the balls or brains to walk it back, admit they were wrong and eat humble pie. Instead they just play the only card they ever play; bluff. Keep pushing bullshit and faking confidence and rely on idiots to trust you.
It's not going to work.

>> No.11907095

>>11907071
BCH still winning. Hashrate still higher. And it's profitable to mine now so it's not going down. This is just stupid. BSV lost in every way its possible to lose.

>> No.11907101

>>11905026
Because he doesn't agree with a permissioned blockchain thats centrally mined by 1-2 companies?

>> No.11907404

War over
>>11907259

>> No.11908680
File: 532 KB, 792x1008, Cynthia Sheppard.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11908680

>>11907086
so

ABC: split block for each thread -> constantly keep bumping into unknown UTXOs -> put em into queue to deal with later -> deal with the queue after threads are done
SV: split block for each thread -> sometimes bump into a unknown UTXO -> put em into queue to deal with later -> deal with the queue after threads are done

ABC still gets beaten by SV because the queue will be shorter

>> No.11908707

>>11908680
Repeating yourself because you don't know what a fast bloom filter is doesn't do anything other than make you look stupid.

>> No.11908730
File: 606 KB, 800x1200, tree on the edge.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11908730

>>11908707
well screw you and your arrogance then buddy, what else can i say. i thought i knew what a bloom filter is but apparently i dont and im just stupid.