/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.11861832]

Why is CSW even doing a contentious fork? He is crashing the whole crypto market and wasting millions of his money for what? Why not just fork the coin without the drama?

[Anonymous No.11861845]

>>11861832
I think it's a mistake to think CSW is having that much of an impact on the market. It's one factor of many, 6000 was going to fall no matter what. I don't understand him either though.

[Anonymous No.11861857]

>node subsidies
>block limits
>malleability fix
>Non Pow consensus (UASF)
>Substituting off chain for on chain (lightning network, LBtc)
Blockstream


>node subsidies
>block limits
>malleability fix
>Non Pow consensus (arbitrary, centralized block validation every 10 blocks)
>Substituting off chain for on chain (Wormhole Cash)
ABC another blockstream company

[Anonymous No.11861858]

>>11861845
>>11861832

no one cares what you think
dont like it?STIFF

[Anonymous No.11861860]

>>11861857
nice pasta, but it isn't on point

[Anonymous No.11861898]

>>11861860
what's wrong with it

[Anonymous No.11861915]

>>11861898
not trying to answer my question

[Anonymous No.11861926]

>>11861857
So bch fags finally realizing what blockstream did was right. We all knew bch holders were slow learners. Sv supporter are the ones below 60 iq.

[Anonymous No.11861949]

>>11861926
this is the kind of response I was baiting for

[Anonymous No.11861953]

>>11861832

It's not about the money.

[Anonymous No.11861987]

>>11861858

Answer the question Craig.

[Anonymous No.11862061]

>>11861915
oh didn't realise you were op

Craig wants bitcoin by proof of work and will do anything to achieve it because he is already financially independent and is a libertarian and understands better than most people on this earth the evil of currency debasement.
because of the existence of the alt market and those who perpetuate it (Jihan) bitcoin is proof of stake right now not proof work as hashpower can be bought. i.e bitcoin is currently governed by he who has the most money not the most work.
Craigs only option is to destroy the part of the industry that is not invested in the establishment of bitcoin as peer to peer cash governed by proof of work.
he will do this by forcing others to spend money fighting him until they go broke or capitulate.
he will win because the companies on sv are creating value, so the hashrate invested in sv will receive that value where jihans alt coin miners are dependent on the perpetuation of the speculative bubble

[Anonymous No.11862088]

>>11862061
Damn, you are not even trolling. You actually believe in SV and want the market to crash.

>companies on SV are creating value
I don't think any company even wants to be remotely attached to SV.

[Anonymous No.11862136]

>>11862088
>I don't think any company even wants to be remotely attached to SV.
SBI
Nchain, their patents and BMG
Coingeek
pic related

[Anonymous No.11862403]

>>11862088
>You actually believe in SV and want the market to crash.
Calm down, clown! Now's not the time for fear. That comes later...

[Anonymous No.11862443]

>>11861832
>>11861845

[Anonymous No.11862474]

>>11862061
>Craig wants bitcoin by proof of work
thwn why does he go against the consensus by hash every fucking time?

[Anonymous No.11862504]

>>11862474
there's no arbitrary time frame for victory.
it's not over till one dies.

[Anonymous No.11862531]

S

[Anonymous No.11862536]

>>11862504
man when you are trying to support sobrierity by getting drunk just one more time you already lost just wont admit it

[Anonymous No.11862560]

>>11862443
Yeah, but his idea for a stable system sucks balls.

[Anonymous No.11862734]

>>11861832
Because without dire warnings of impending doom and a manufactured fake controversy people that holded this long wouldn't sell, and their greed knows no limit.

[Anonymous No.11862749]

>>11861926
The blockstream changes implemented were idiotic and not backed by hashpower, so the narrative from the bch side that hashpower would always signal the correct thing was observably correct at the time.
But after a year long bear market and slump largely due to the idiotic changes the hashpower had originally signaled against and the market *still* irrationally preferring those changes over the correct approach, hashpower on the legitimate bitcoin chain was so low it was practical to invest in an attack to attempt to destroy that legitimate chain, which is what nChain is.
So now the BCH faction were faced with a situation in which the hashpower was signalling for idiotic changes, and they addressed it in two ways, firstly by being willing to countersignal against that hashpower in the exact same way, even to the extent of unprofitable mining, because rational BCHers are in this for the long term and prepared to sacrifice in the short to protect it. And secondly by making security changes that mean even the hostile hashrate signaling for incorrect changes --will never get its fucking way-- making it economically irrational for them to even continue to try. That they sperg out uselessly and keep up their bullshit social media attacks whining about how unfair it is that they've been hard blocked out of the process after proving bad faith is of zero consequence. They lost in every way imaginable, and the plan for BCH pulled through and is proceeding apace despite the massive failed attack.

[Anonymous No.11862767]

>>11862443
His idea for a stable system is so bad even in itself it qualifies for a scam, because it's a lemon. Combined with his attacks on one of the very few projects that isn't a fucking scam, everything he is doing is a scam.

[Anonymous No.11862780]

>>11862749
>>11862767
In so many words this is what you want
>node subsidies
>block limits
>malleability fix
>Non Pow consensus (arbitrary, centralized block validation every 10 blocks)
>Substituting off chain for on chain (Wormhole Cash)

[Anonymous No.11862790]

>>11862749
>The blockstream changes implemented were idiotic and not backed by hashpower
>not backed by hashpower
ahahhahaha this is what cashies tell themselves?

[Anonymous No.11862815]

>>11862790
It's true. Look up segwit2x NYA vs segwit signalling. The blockstream plan was firmly rejected by hashpower and forced through by the exchanges. The hashpower fell in line afterward because it was either that or go bankrupt. They did make a chain with what they viewed as the correct path though and that's bch. Look up uahf. You won't because you're a coretard fuckwit, but for anyone who reads this and cares about the truth everything I just said is verifiable true in the historical record.

[Anonymous No.11862830]

>>11862780
Everything you just said is a lie, with the potential exception of malfix. If you want to tell me why that alone justifies what nchain has done go ahead but afaik malfix didn't even require a consensus rule change this fork so once again you appear to be talking out of your ass.

[Anonymous No.11862834]

>>11862815
which of these things do you not want you shill
>node subsidies
>block limits
>malleability fix
>Non Pow consensus (arbitrary, centralized block validation every 10 blocks)
>Substituting off chain for on chain (Wormhole Cash)

[Anonymous No.11862854]

>>11862834
Once again. Every single one of them is complete bullshit. You are either ignorant or lying. No consensus changes in the present fork do any of that sfuff you blathering shitcock.

[Anonymous No.11862862]

>>11862830
>>11862854

nchain has done nothing contentious. ABC caused the creation of SV when they insisted on introducing DSV (blockstream op code CHECKSIGFROMSTACKVERIFY) and CTOR (pre consensus)
every 10th block on the abc chain is hardcoded in that is not proof of work

[Anonymous No.11862907]

>>11862862
> nchain has done nothing contentious
Raise the limit to 128mb, they can't even handle ten percent of that throughput sustained, and they cratered their network completely on 50 percent of it, because they ignorantly and irrationally rejected simple correct block propagation optimizations (CTOR)
They also did this *against* majority hashpower signal whilst threatening that side of the aisle with sabotage and attacks.
The truth is the exact opposite of your lies. They did nothing that was not both contentious *and observably stupid and incorrect* and they continue to burn hundreds of thousands of dollars a day and employ fuckwit shills like you who have no idea what's going on in support of their attack.

By contrast all the rest of the ecosystem did was what was required to actually scale on chain for peer to peer electronic cash for the world, in concert with the hashpower signaling, and took measures to insulate from any possible damage from the nchain attacks no matter what they do.

[Anonymous No.11862909]

>>11862061
> is a libertarian

so in other words... a retard

>bitcoin is currently governed by he who has the most money not the most work.

implying that money doesn't buy pow.

>he will win because the companies on sv are creating value

lol, you are delusional.

calvin literally said in an interview he supports sv because it's better for miners. not because it's better for the people USING the coins. calvin gave csw all this hash power because he's a greedy cunt that can't have enough.
csw is a conman that got lucky. nothing more.
if csw wanted to create value, well he just threw away literally millions of dollars on a pissing contest that he could have used to pay devs to make a wallet that doesn't require a phd to use or help introduce bitcoin to third world countries and create safe ways for it to be used without a lot of technical knowledge...
instead, he goes on twitter and bitches like a 14 year old girl on tumblr.
hmmmmm... it's almost like he just wants his chain to win to make himself rich... he's had fucking YEARS now to push adoption and he's done fuck all.
can't wait for another crypto to kill btc and all related shitcoins.

[Anonymous No.11862982]

>>11862907
>>11862907
there you go
>wants block limits
you know you can mine whatever size block you want right? not very competitive to mine small ones though when there's no limit subsidizing your incompetence
>wants node subsidy (CTOR)
helping jihans lack of innovation and second layer solutions to problems he creates
>rest of the ecosystem
literally no one but exchanges sided with ABC pic related >>11862136

[Anonymous No.11862984]

>>11862907
Curious, what do you think about this?

[Anonymous No.11863004]

Bitcoin Onions Virgin

[Anonymous No.11863031]

>>11862982
>block limits
Both sides have block limits turbo nigger. Yours just crashes your network.
>node subsidy (CTOR)
It is flat out not a fucking node subsidy. *you are wrong*. Get over it.
> no one but exchanges sided with ABC
You could at least try to lie convincingly. The massive bulk of the ecosystem sided with bch, and the relative asset prices prove it, the hashrate proves it, the fucking futures price proves it.
But Calvin, you just couldn't accept you got conned by a fucking incompetent so you had to construct an elaborate false reality otherwise.
You are wrong.
Get over it.
Stop burning money pursuing a strategy that can only fail.
Or don't, go broke, that works too.
What you won't get is your fucking way.

[Anonymous No.11863040]

>>11862907
>They also did this *against* majority hashpower signal whilst threatening that side of the aisle with sabotage and attacks.

Curious what you think about this then (see image)
>805 of miners that mined BCH up until the fork moved on to mine SV consensus rules, this amounted to approximately 4000PH/s in has. Surprisingly, another 5000PH/s of hash (previously not on BCH) landed on the other arm of the fork to mine with what is known as the 'ABC' ruleset.

This sure doesn't sound like SV is going against the "majority" of the BCH community

[Anonymous No.11863065]

>>11863031
yeah but SV is working to get rid of it, whereas you want one.
CTOR makes smaller nodes more competitive
List more companies that sided with abc than in pic related then>>11862136

you want a block limit
you want small nodes
you want centralised non proof of work block validatoin every 10 blocks
you want Wormhole cash to take adoption off chain

[Anonymous No.11863091]

>>11863040
By the way, notice how https://cash.coin.dance/blocks is being manipulated. All the original BCH miners mentioned in the image in my previous post - Coingeek, SVPool, BMG Pool, okminer, Mempool - are no longer shown as miners of "Bitcoin Cash" (BCHABC).

Only the ones that are about 20-25% of the has are now "Bitcoin Cash" (BCHABC) miners.

[Anonymous No.11863105]

>>11863040
That entire article is bullshit propaganda designed to obfuscate the way mining actually works from the reader. And the way it works as a fucking business is very important and simple and its this; "miners mine whatever is most immediately profitable for them to mine". That's it. That's one hundred percent of the truth when it comes to what the bulk of existing hashpower in the world does, it was true on Nov 12 2017 when 90 percent of that hashpower abandoned the btc chain because it was most profitable to mine bch, and it's true now.
In light of that, there is no rational distinction between "btc hashpower" and "bch hashpower" there's just hashpower period. If you make an irrational investment in a large amount of hashpower to push through your agenda because you think you can defeat a smaller segment of hashpower, you'd best be confident that that other segment doesn't have the financial resources to provide higher profit to the general market for hashpower, or your power play will fail.
That's what happened with nchain. They thought they saw a target and tried a dick swinging hostile takeover, but what they identified as a little fish turned around and ripped them to pieces.
Now they're petitioning the law of the ocean to change the rules.
It doesn't work like that. And they're not letting the pain of their defeat teach them this lesson.

[Anonymous No.11863113]

>>11863065
> yeah but SV is working to get rid of it
Wrong. Both sides are working to get rid of it. SV is just failing so hard they're destroying themselves and shouting at abc for not following them off the bridge.
Everything else you said was a complete lie not even worth responding to.

[Anonymous No.11863122]

The whole mess is worth it if it bankrupts Roger and Jihan. They're by far the most damaging people in crypto.

[Anonymous No.11863127]

guys.. please...ABC OR SV doesnt matter... atleast your not holding vechain...arent you?

[Anonymous No.11863131]

>>11862815
signaling doesn't mean shit where the hash went that's bitcoin.

[Anonymous No.11863140]

>>11863131
how do cashies like to say? 'it's pure capitalism baby!"

[Anonymous No.11863144]

>>11863105
I agree with what you say at this point:
> And the way it works as a fucking business is very important and simple and its this; "miners mine whatever is most immediately profitable for them to mine". That's it. That's one hundred percent of the truth when it comes to what the bulk of existing hashpower in the world does

But right now, it's not profitable to mine "Bitcoin Cash" (BCHABC) - see image to the left taken from https://cash.coin.dance/blocks

So what the fuck are those six players doing, moving from the profitable BTC to generate 5-9000PH/s for the BCHABC chain within 24 hours?

It's almost like someone wanted to declare a quick victory, first with the block size argument and then with proof of work accumulation argument.

I expect that the next argument will be that even if BCHSV has more blocks and more hash (when BCHABC loses the proof of work advantage), that doesn't matter because they've got the centralised checkpoints and so it doesn't matter who wins the hashwar.

[Anonymous No.11863145]

>>11863113
SV has already achieved a 64mb and near paypal tps, abc has done shit all

>Everything else you said was a complete lie not even worth responding to.
so you don't want checkpoints every 10 blocks?

[Anonymous No.11863156]

>>11863145
Nobody gives a shit. KEK

[Anonymous No.11863161]

>>11863131
I think you want to suck my dick.
i know if I ask you you'll tell me you won't.
But if I make a promise that I will stab you in every case where you're not sucking my dick.
A d there's nothing you can do but suck my dick or get stabbed.
You're going to suck my dick.
That's what happened with the exchanges forcing hashpower onto the btc chain.
If you think that's voting with their cpu power as outlined in the whitepaper...
Unironically suck my dick.

[Anonymous No.11863163]

>>11863144
because "miners mine whatever is most immediately profitable for them to mine"
is the dumbest understanding of bitcoin you can have. If you believed that miners would just be double spending all the time
Miners invest more than anyone in the long term success of bitcoin, miners are long term not immediate profit

[Anonymous No.11863175]

>>11863144
They're being paid. That is exactly the fucking point. The only kind of hashpower that exists in bulk is the hashpower that hashes for payment. End of story. Your fantasy otherwise or thinking the hash behind BSV is different, is just that, a fantasy.

[Anonymous No.11863180]

>>11863145
you do realize it would take the core devs literally 10 minutes to increase the block size also right? so if you think that will be a decisive factor over who comes out on top in the end... thing is increasing the blocksize is a short term solution. a bandaid that should have been applied non the less but it's not a long term solution to scaling. ln isn't either that's a medium term solution to micro payments if it ever works as designed.

[Anonymous No.11863193]

>>11863180
if you believe that go all in btc

[Anonymous No.11863195]

>>11863161
you can suck your own dick retard.
the whitepaper states where the majority of hash goes that's bitcoin. it doesn't discern reasons and morality at any point.

[Anonymous No.11863201]

>>11863163
>"miners mine whatever is most immediately profitable for them to mine" is the dumbest understanding of bitcoin you can have.
>miners are long term not immediate profit

Care to expand?

[Anonymous No.11863202]

>>11863193
i don't hold anything else in crypto, bbtc is the only thing that matters all other shit is tidal locked to it, but i can't go all in and wouldn't even if i could.

[Anonymous No.11863204]

>>11863145
The 64mb block is what cratered your on chain throughput fuckwit. It was an epic failure. Not a success. Read and understand the graph in >>11862749
> so you don't want checkpoints every 10 blocks
I want what's best.
I will accept whatever temporary compromises are necessary in order to keep you and fools like you from tampering with the ledger and imposing your demonstrably idiotic agenda. When you have burned yourself to the ground, we'll evaluate the best path forward from there, which may well be removing them.

[Anonymous No.11863217]

>>11862749
>still shilling the fuck out of this memegraph which shows SV outperforming ABC.
How much is Roger paying you to be his personal nut sucker?

[Anonymous No.11863226]

>>11863180
If you just do a ten minute blocksize increase, you get sv. It can't even keep up with a constant stream of 10mb blocks. The core node software was never optimized for high volume on chain throughput, because they never intended to actually allow that. Core is a useless shitcoin that appeals only to low information technically ignorant olebs like you. And you do not fucking matter.

[Anonymous No.11863236]

>>11863217
> s'oy virgin lying
Wow huge surprise.

[Anonymous No.11863258]

>>11863204
>I will accept whatever temporary compromises are necessary in order to keep you and fools like you from tampering with the ledger and imposing your demonstrably idiotic agenda.
boom, all credibility gone. That is not proof of work it is centralised governance based on amaury's feelings, that is not bitcoin.

It always amazes me how you shills end up doing the opposite of what you intend.

[Anonymous No.11863264]

>>11863236
when SV wins you will reach levels of butthurt you thought were unimaginable

[Anonymous No.11863296]

>>11863258
Wrong. It's the entire ecosystem acting as an immune system to push out a dangerous disease. That you see an immune response and identify it as "centralized" rather than "hey why does everyone think I'm a fucking germ?" says everything there is to know about your shitcoin chain.
You have already lost. Now your only choice is how much time you spend ignoring it and burning money.

[Anonymous No.11863329]

>>11863296
let's recap
you want

>node subsidies>>11862907
>block limits>>11862907
>malleability fix >>11862830
>Non Pow consensus (arbitrary, centralized block validation every 10 blocks)>>11863204
>Substituting off chain for on chain (Wormhole Cash)

and a guy to suck your dick >>11863161

[Anonymous No.11863337]

>>11863329
Lets recap
All you have is lies and literally no fucking case at all.

[Anonymous No.11863362]

>>11863337
alright gayboy, hopefully you and amaury keep agreeing on your definition of "demonstrably idiotic" because you're stuck with whatever he wants to do

[Anonymous No.11863399]

>>11863362
Also bullshit niggerfaggot. The moment the bch ecosystem as a whole does something I disagree with is the moment I liquidate for something else. The fact it's been ten years and that hasn't happened yet says everything I need it to.

[Anonymous No.11863478]

>>11863329
Do you honestly believe this node subsidy shit? You realise that doesn't make any sense at all right? You seem a bit like a shill.

[Anonymous No.11863516]

>>11863478
> "a bit"
dude that's a fuckin shill

[Anonymous No.11863529]

>>11863478
it's a shill desu, absolutely nobody who is not being paid believes in SV bullshit.

[Anonymous No.11864319]

>>11863529

Brainlet detected

[Anonymous No.11864332]

>>11864319
Kino logo desu

[Anonymous No.11864435]

>>11864319
So how do I get a job as a shill at nChain?

[Anonymous No.11864465]

>>11863226
no nigga core does not appeal to me, i'm only saying that bitcoin is btc and only a deluded cuck claims otherwise. it being shit or not is an other matter.

[Anonymous No.11864548]

>>11864465
it's not see >>11862815