/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.16856458]

Now that its an objective fact that CSW is Satoshi, have you all sold your impostor bitcoin for the true bitcoin?

[Anonymous No.16856478]

>>16856458
please stop sperging out for a minute. something is going on that transcends bsv...it involves literally almost every coin. bitcoin gold / diamond are up 50%...dash is up 100%
we need to figure out what it is and bsv sperg schitzo rambling is not helpful

[Anonymous No.16856488]

all in BSV and waiting for 12k$ EOY

[Anonymous No.16856496]

kys CW is not satoshi and will dump by Feb 3rd.

[Anonymous No.16856519]

Yes sir... big BIG green candles is objective proof that CREG IS SATOJ!
BUY BUY BUY!

[Anonymous No.16856525]

>>16856496
I hope so. I want to buy more before Satoshi transfers all his wealth over

[Anonymous No.16856529]

>It's $60
>Oh no the scamcoin it will be 0!
>It's $160
>Heh, Easy short!
>It's $200
>Classic pump&dump scheme, adding to my short.
>It's $320
>It will eventually go down...
>It's $400
>This was top

[Anonymous No.16856537]

>>16856478
This something big is coming and people are hedging into crypto to deal with it

[Anonymous No.16856567]

>>16856529
>>16856537
Yes dear it is all organic. Many real customers and big companys all buy in at same time on same day... wow!

[Anonymous No.16856568]

>>16856537
its really odd, i've been studying it for the past few hours. its external money coming in (not someone swapping one coin for another). total market cap of entire market has grown by like 35B over the last 2 days.
at the same time, tether is not showing insane minting at present....is it actual USD being deposited into exchanges? perhaps....

[Anonymous No.16856594]

>>16856568
Black swan event is coming fren. Whether youre in btc or bsv youre going to be rich. Crypto is about to explode.

[Anonymous No.16856659]

>>16856478
Those shitcoins are just riding on the coat of the
true bitcoin pump.

[Anonymous No.16856704]

>>16856659
Yup, nailed it. This should have been an EZ observation for anons, but once again I’m left disappointed.

[Anonymous No.16856836]

>>16856704
This is /biz/ after all, the same low IQ people who have been lying and slandering Satoshi for ages.

[Anonymous No.16856869]

>>16856568
>35B
What are the fuck are you talking about?

[Anonymous No.16857199]

>>16856458
Guys what is happening. Everything is pumping including Zcash. I cashed out completely a week ago because I couldn't take any more losses. Is this what it feels to be justed?

[Anonymous No.16857220]

>>16856869
what dont you understand specifically? 35b?

[Anonymous No.16857222]

>>16857199
>selling the bottom

[Anonymous No.16857742]

>>16857199
Everything following in the wake of the true bitcoin pump. A rising tide floats all boats.

[Anonymous No.16857849]

>>16856458
>Now that its an objective fact that CSW is Satoshi, have you all sold your impostor bitcoin for the true bitcoin?
But segregated witness is an improvement to reduce blocksize of the chain.
I can appreciate wanting a Bitcoin that follows a ten year old whitepaper exactly, but you're not using a ten year old cell phone anymore, are you? No. Technology improves. I don't understand why you assume the theoretical Bitcoin proposed by Satoshi is better than what it evolved into after it was used for several years and we discovered its shortcomings.

tl,dr: BTC isn't the original Bitcoin; it's an improvement.

[Anonymous No.16857864]

Testing 40k support again

[Anonymous No.16857874]

easy long. there is a bullish divergence.

[Anonymous No.16857882]

>>16856478
A new [core cuck] narrative emerges.

[Anonymous No.16857891]

>>16856488
Checked.
Gonna make it.

[Anonymous No.16857895]

>>16857874
please be right

[Anonymous No.16857935]

>>16857874
>easy long
short before the correction, then long

[Anonymous No.16857969]

I sold too early and basically threw 20k down the shitting street

[Anonymous No.16858636]

>>16857849
Segwit defiled bitcoin, this is why Satoshi had to come back to create the his actual vision for bitcoin that wasn't perverted.

[Anonymous No.16859083]

>>16858636
>Segwit defiled bitcoin
how

[Anonymous No.16859092]

>>16856478

We're in a bullmarket and people try to buy "cheap" Bitcoin (i.e. Bitcoin Gold). Prices rise fast since those shitcoins got thin orderbooks.

[Anonymous No.16859119]

>>16859083
reduced the incentive to mine honestly by making it cheaper to attack the network because a segwit transaction only needs a hash of a signature not a signature. Miners can stop signaling acceptance of segwit and take segwit, sell and short btc bitcoins and not destroy themselves because competing sha256 chain exists with unlimited capacity. It wouldn't be illegal because there is no chain of digital signatures to prove ownership of segwit bitcoins

https://medium.com/@adam_selene/the-segwit-15-attack-b0ecbb926777

[Anonymous No.16859131]

>>16859083
It violated Satoshi's original white paper.

[Anonymous No.16859152]

you need to fucking google the meaning of the word objective, or better yet let me help you by using it in a sentence.
it's an objective fact, that OP is a dirty pajeet faggot trying to pump his masters coin.

[Anonymous No.16859240]

>>16859152
>ob·jec·tive
>/əbˈjektiv/
>adjective
>1. (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
"historians try to be objective and impartial"

CSW is objectively Satoshi.

[Anonymous No.16859360]

>>16859119
since segwit was activated on the BTC blockchain two years and a half ago, did anyone notice a so-called 'segwit attack' on bitcoin? No, despite the fact that many ppl could have profited from it. Your explanation sounds like FUD and is dismissed.

>>16859131
So? Would you have refused 4G/LTE because 'it violates 3G/UMTS original white paper' ?

[Anonymous No.16859369]

>>16859360
>it hasn't happened yet so it won't
see you in may

[Anonymous No.16859445]

>>16857849
Segwit is not an improvement. It's a stain on the codebase and didn't solve the actual problem of mempool congestion. Blockstream literally set crypto back at least five years with that carrot on a stick.
>2MB (Segwit2X) was a VERY mild compromise. The forks (BCH and other) prove that this was technically VERY feasible (if not several times more), despite Maxwell and Co's insistence that it was dangerous.
>Validating nodes can be run with only the UTXO set (i.e. you need less than 10GB of storage to run a validating node).
>Nodes can be synced from a single UTXO commit (i.e. you only need to download less than 10GB to sync a validating node).
BTC is not Bitcoin and it is not better than Bitcoin in any way. It's popularity is pivoted on maintaining its perceived value by pushing this kind of rhetoric onto technically illiterate retards.

[Anonymous No.16859463]

>>16859360
>did anyone notice a so-called 'segwit attack' on bitcoin?
It weakens the security of BTC. This means it makes attacks easier?
Taking what I've written here about the UTXO set:
>>16859445
... what exactly was the criticism leveraged by the BTC/Blockstream camp in opposition to a simple blocksize increase?

[Anonymous No.16859468]

>>16859360
>So? Would you have refused 4G/LTE because 'it violates 3G/UMTS original white paper' ?

Completely irrelevant. Wireless is not bitcoin. Its a separate technology that doesn't have a white paper that bitcoin has.

[Anonymous No.16859483]

>>16859468
I think the problem here is more so that he's gobbled up the "SegWit is an improvement!" propaganda pieces.
He's probably relatively new inside the /r/bitcoin echo chamber and has never left to seek technical opinions or understandings elsewhere.

[Anonymous No.16859638]

>>16856488
Checked

>>16856496
It doesnt matter if Craigs satoshi or not because BSV is the only coin following satishi's whitepaper
It's the true bitcoon. The original chain

[Anonymous No.16859811]

>>16859131
>>16859638
Could someone explain to me why a few retards are so fixated on a eleven years old white paper? Why is it SO important that the current technical implementation of Bitcoin stays religiously attached to the original white paper? I really don't understand.

[Anonymous No.16859849]

>>16859811
whatever is claiming to be bitcoin should be described by bitcoins specification.

if you want a crypto currency that can't scale on chain, needs off chain networks, has no trail of signatures, no spv, prioritizes nodes that don't do work etc that's fine, but it's not bitcoin

[Anonymous No.16859852]

>>16859811
It's because the deviations from the whitepaper that you are seeing are deviations from the original intention of what Bitcoin was supposed to be.
It was intended as a currency
>that could actually be used.
And the BTC camp laying claim to the title of "Bitcoin" - after butchering it - therefore pissed a lot of people off. It deviated - and it butchered it - and it still claims to be the authority on what the "real" Bitcoin is. The people who are now behind it may have bags, but they're completely morally bankrupt.

[Anonymous No.16859980]

>>16856458
Dumb money threw in the towel and Iran crisis was the excuse whales needed to initiate a trend change in BTC followed by altseason. Dumbies will fomo HARD.

[Anonymous No.16860012]

>>16856496
Imagine the life of Gregory Maxwell. Every day, besides shitposting reddit as nullc, he pretends to be about 5 other people (contrarian, stopanddecrypt, freetrader, etc) and also shitposts under them at reddit, twitter, bitco.in, etc. On top of this, he also spams biz. This is literally all he does, every day. Poor Gregory

[Anonymous No.16860047]

I bought BSV below 100 as a 'just in case'... We all know he aint Satoshi. So I think I will sell 33% of my BSV shitcoin now. Nice profit. When it dumps back I might buy some more. What do you think is Craigs magic 'sweet spot' price to dump his BSV? (also one BSV was bought for more than 60 BTC a few hours ago).