Serious Discussion About Crypto Only Please

[Anonymous No.11842989]

Hi guys, I've been distancing myself from cryptos for a while, but have been recently trying to get into it again.

So I've heard about the Bitcoin Cash fork deal, but could someone please summarise (as objectively correct as possible) what the whole fuzz with the two ultra autists Roger Ver and Craig Wright is? (And maybe also explain who Jihan Wu is, and whether he's important for Bitcoin or not)

There are so many shitty blog posts and obvious subjective news articles about these guys floating around
(as always in the crypto space unfortunately) that I couldn't be bothered to keep up.

I think it's safe to assume that both of these guys are con artists?

Was this fight between them (and the uncertainty behind Bitcoin / Bitcoin Cash) the reason, crypto dipped?

Lastly, if you could point me to some serious, objectively correct and uptodate news sources in the crypto space, I'd be -really- thankful.

[Anonymous No.11843029]

>>11842989
You are already brainwashed. Go back to wherever you came from. CSW is obviously a con. There is no proof is satoshi and he keep saying it. No one has huge baseless claims so you are just making accusations with no information. You sound like a fucking redditor.

t. owns no BTC or BCH

[Anonymous No.11843040]

>>11842989
What's there to discuss? Crypto is cyclical, the main coins (BTC ETH XMR) will survive, the rest will go the way of PrimeCoin/AuroraCoin/FeatherCoin/etc...
We will recover higher but it will take a few years

[Anonymous No.11843064]

BCH is on life support. I own 1 SV for the lols.

[Anonymous No.11843089]

>>11843029
What are you even talking about?
I've not made any claims or assumptions, in fact that's the whole reason why I ask here you idiot. (I also know that r/bitcoin and r/btc are biased, corrupt and/or factually incorrect as well as pretty much 95% of the internet in regards to crypto)

[Anonymous No.11843108]

>>11842989
All three of them are Bitcoin miners.

Roger Ver (the one on the right) seems like an idealist who just wants to back and profit from Bitcoin. At first he was against the existence of BCH but after Segwit 2x failed, he started promoting BCH.

Jihan Wu (The one on the left) is the boss of Bitmain, the biggest manufacturer of ASIC Bitcoin mining machines (S9, etc). His company has a huge mining pool that mines different coins that they make ASICs for. They mine in secret for about 6 months before releasing the new machines to the public. He promised he'd back bigger blocks, but went ahead and sponsored Bitcoin ABC, which in the end caused the Bitcoin chain to split into Bitcoin (BTC) and Bitcoin Cash (BCH). Thus the chance to fix bitcoin were wasted because this guy still supports both BCH and BTC, the real bitcoin idea became just an altcoin thanks to him.

Craig Wright (CSW) (center) is Faketoshi. He presented himself as Satoshi and used a parlor trick to prodice "hashes, which have been signed by Satoshi himself". Actually, anyone can produce such by using Satoshi's published signatures from the blockchain itself. CSW is the chief scientist of a mining company, nChain. He claims that the new version of Bitcoin ABC (for the November upgrade) contains a new opcode that would make Bitcoin (Cash) illegal in most countries. So, to save Bitcoin as global money, he, his company and buddies rolled out their own BCH (Bitcoin SV), which caused a chain split in BCH on November 15th.

Ever since, Jihan and Roger are defending Bitcoin ABC, while CSW is mining Bitcoin SV, while threatening to destroy the Bitcoin ABC chain with superior mining power. This hasn't happened yet. CWS also threatened to sell off a lot of BTC, which apparently he's also mining, so that the hashwar can be funded. He literally threatened to crash the BTC price, on Twitter, a couple of days before the price did crash.

[Anonymous No.11843134]

>>11843108
This

[Anonymous No.11843205]

>>11843108
Why have hedge fund managers switched from Bitcoin to Bitcoin Cash? I don't understand, Bitcoin still has 8x more hashing rate than BCH

[Anonymous No.11843229]

>>11842989
>>11843029
>>11843064
>>11843108

OBLIGATORY /BIZ/ READING!

IGNORE SHILLS AND EDUCATE YOURSELF!

[Anonymous No.11843244]

>>11843108
On the other side of the fence, you have Bitcoin (BTC) with the company Blockstream hiring most of the core node developers. Greg Maxwell is (was?) the CTO. He firmly believed that big blocks would never work. There was a great info screenshot on /biz/ explaining how and why the idea of the Lightning network and the sidechains were born.

He has some insights, such as reveling how Faketoshi is able to produce numbers "signed by Satoshi", while not being able to sign a message with one of Satoshi's keys or move Satoshi's coins:

https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/81115/if-someone-wanted-to-pretend-to-be-satoshi-by-posting-a-fake-signature-to-defrau

To make matters worse, Blockstream is sponsored by AXA, a company that has to do with the three-letter agencies and the Bilderberg group.

To summarize: shit sucks.

[Anonymous No.11843269]

>>11843205
pic related. Core is cancer.

[Anonymous No.11843278]

>>11843229
Bullshit

[Anonymous No.11843304]

>>11843269
These BCHABC123 shill posts are so cringe. If banks or bilderfucks, and boomer ETF money are going to pump my bags, Awesome!!! If BTC was actually unusable the narrative would shift. BCHABC fucks are some of the worst. Always so angry since losing 95% of its value.

[Anonymous No.11843307]

>>11843244
Oh, one more thing - "2nd layer solutions":

Bitmain is trying to create a layer on top of BCH, called Wormhole, which is essentially a sidechain of a BCH-backed altcoin (aiming to guarantee 0-conf payments(?)) that springs into existence by burning BCH coins. This seems to piss off CSW.

Blockstream is trying to create at least two layers on top of BTC: 1. The Lightning network (actually, the Lightning labs are working on that) - a network that has an unsolved problem staring it in the face, and requiring always-online nodes to keep your money safe. 2. Their own sidechain (I forget its name).

nChain have filed for a ton of patents regarding Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency and are threatening everyone with lawsuits. There is some speculation that CSW / nChain are developing their own solution for 0-conf transactions (instead of faster blocks, which seems the obvious solution and is vehemently opposed by CSW) which is in direct competition with the above.

[Anonymous No.11843318]

>>11842989

[Anonymous No.11843323]

ABC is dealing with the problem of Block thoroughfare. To put it simply, you can make a 64 mb block, but sending that block to other nodes often leads to problems. This means the introduction of CTOR (Re-ordering the transactions inside a block) and Graphene (some other techno-voodoo I don't really understand)


CSW doesn't like these additions for whatever reasons. Trying to understand these reasons is probably harder than trying to understand CTOR and Graphene themselves. Roger is a miner, but not a dev. Who he chooses to support in the ABC vs SV war is important to which coin will succeed. He chose ABC because CSW called him a faggot, basically

[Anonymous No.11843335]

>>11843304
Nobody cares what you think subhuman. Go fellate luke-jr

[Anonymous No.11843354]

>>11842989
obviously they are the real deal, that's satoshi right there in the middle!

[Anonymous No.11843363]

shill wars, the thread

[Anonymous No.11843374]

>>11843335
Yet you replied and said nothing to refute my point about actually making money. Screw both honestly. Id rather just buy XMR at these prices. But BTC has a future at least.

[Anonymous No.11843383]

>>11843323
This.

CTOR helps with block propagation times. Basically, your node will just need to know which transactions are in the block and its nonce/hash, but not how the transactions are ordered within the block, because that's now set in stone (in the ABC client). Then your node can re-create the block on its own, saving a lot of bandwidth (not sure how much).

Not sure why CSW hates fast block propagation done in this way.

[Anonymous No.11843405]

>>11842989
Remember the fork of bitcoin when one side included a mandatory protocol change into their upgrade? A protocol change that BU voted against? Remember how the change was sold as mandatory to scale and scaling was their primary focus? But while they said one thing they were really pushing for side-chains under the guise of "protecting" bitcoin. Remember how they bribed exchanges and most of their arguments were personal attacks?

Can you tell whether I am talking about SegWit/Lightning or CTOR/Wormhole? Because I can't.

[Anonymous No.11843432]

>>11843205
Bitcoin Cash is closer to what Bitcoin was supposed to be, and the reason why it's an altcoin right now are some clever political machinations by "them" and by Chinese farmers who want to have their cake and eat it too.

Bitcoin Cash is now also accepted at lots of restaurants and web pages. Because it actually is meant to function as a currency, unlike BTC, which is now meant to be a "store of value".

[Anonymous No.11843441]

>>11843374
You don't make points. You just spew bullshit. And you're doing it again. You have no idea what the fuck you're doing and you're going to go broke. Good. You deserve it. Knee pads motherfucker.

[Anonymous No.11843446]

>>11843383
it's the philosophy of the thing. CTOR isn't proven but it changes the base protocol.
If we need to change the protocol after optimizing the software, so be it. But lets base our decisions in real world data.
ABC focuses on building alt-coin ASICs... creating wormhole tokens... they don't care about scaling. They say one thing and do another. I've seen that movie before and all too recently.
I'm sticking with the group that is spending money to figure out scaling RIGHT NOW. Nobody will build on a coin that might maybe one day in 18 months soon possibly scale.

[Anonymous No.11843460]

>>11843441
You are delusional. How am I going to go broke? My investments are made and ill be just fine if it goes to 0. You sound like you are struggling.

[Anonymous No.11843496]

SV fags are full of shit. They started a war, then they lost it in hysterically bad fashion. Now they're whining about it. That's all this is. And then there's core cultist fuckwits on the side just trying to score points for their sabotaged shitcoin because they're butthurt the past year proved bchers dead right about them.
This article has a good summary of the full story which really makes what is going on with nchain/sv clear.
https://medium.com/@bill_mcgonigle/but-what-about-the-warlords-something-amazing-just-happened-on-bitcoin-cash-be4143fc8e55

[Anonymous No.11843534]

>>11843496
>SVFAGS
>COREKEKS
>Its all their fault i'm down 95%
>Why don't they just agree with me.

[Anonymous No.11843558]

>>11843432
Idiot

[Anonymous No.11843564]

>>11843534
If you agreed with me I'd worry I was wrong. Fuck off.

[Anonymous No.11843566]

>>11843534
I really don't understand how anyone in the BCH community sided with ABC after they started pulling the same shit Core did.

[Anonymous No.11843591]

>>11843566
Because that's not what happened.

[Anonymous No.11843613]

>>11843566
>>11843564

Dubs of truth. Same shit different pile. BCHABC123 is clearly centralized with Jihan and Ver this last week just confirmed this, its so fucking obvious. immutable after 10 confirmations I mean Kek. I am not even defending BTC. I am just defending which blockchain has the best ability to gain value in another bull. Now the narrative has changed from the corecucks to the SVfags and soon it will be the ABC890 girls ex....

[Anonymous No.11843614]

>>11843564
Credit card cashback bonuses single-handedly purchased me 6 Bitcoin these past four years.

[Anonymous No.11843635]

SHILL THREAD!!!

[Anonymous No.11843663]

>>11843446
I'm perfectly fine with Bitcoin SV. I think they do need CTOR, or something similar. They'll figure it out, I'm sure.

The problem is the "brand name". First, BTC took it, then Bitcoin ABC. I agree that there's no such brand name, but most people think there is.

I'm also not sure I oppose ABC, because I've read somewhere that Wormhole can be built without the questionable new opcode(s). Is that true?

[Anonymous No.11843677]

>>11843591
see
>>11843405
Enjoy your checkpoints

[Anonymous No.11843687]

>>11843663

Wormhole works on both chains. Coin-burn tokens can work on any chain. Just have a smart contract that says "If you deposit xxx to this address than the user gets this much in tokens"

[Anonymous No.11843724]

>>11843663
the problem with wormhole isnt technical so much as the philosophy:
Destroying bitcoin doesn't make sense... bitcoin should be the ultimate coin. It can be traded for tokens but destroying it allows bitcoin to be supplanted by sidechains.

This is the crux of the matter. CTOR/wormhole/segwit/lightning... none of these are horrible in themselves (maybe segwit...that will be seen). The poison is focusing and spending resources on weird sidechains. I want bitcoin with massive fucking blocks to fulfill what I signed up for year ago. ABC and Bitmain like altcoins and sidechains and exchanges. They are trying to bleed profit from fools. I want the team that is 100% about giving sound money to the people and that is BSV.

[Anonymous No.11843771]

>>11843724
You're completely ful of shit and have no idea what you're talking about. CTOR is an on chain block propagation mechanism. All your wormhole bullshit has absolutely zero evidence outside of the fever dreams of coingeek. And you reek like a dishonest sv shill.

[Anonymous No.11843791]

>>11843724

Things like Wormhole will always exist. Deal with it amigo

[Anonymous No.11843814]

>>11842989
nice just bought 100k

[Anonymous No.11843856]

>>11843791
Yep. Wormhole will happen nbd. I'm just sticking with the team who is about bitcoin not tokens.

You do realize ABC assumed leadership and has a huge interest in off chain scaling solutions right? Isn't that a huge conflict of interest?

[Anonymous No.11843930]

>>11843856
>You do realize ABC assumed leadership and has a huge interest in off chain scaling solutions right?

Why you lying anon?

[Anonymous No.11844252]

I have 25 BCHSV super comfy bitch

it is a pity...

I bought in at 200$..

imagine this.

but my informers tell me that truly powerful people want SV

[Anonymous No.11844607]

>>11842989

[Anonymous No.11844837]

I hodl SV because it's proven no new features everything battle tested