Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Maintenance is complete! We got more disk space.
Become a Patron!

/biz/ - Business & Finance


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 19 KB, 450x450, 512D23B4-D882-44A0-BCF5-C71EB5B828C8.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
17051307 No.17051307 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Imagine the power of bitcoin without a centrally planned block size limit.
Imagine transaction fees of less than a cent and tens of thousands of transactions per second.
Imagine bitcoin script unleashed to its full potential.

I feel sorry for the anons that didnt buy in despite all the shill threads :/ They will regret it for the rest of their lives. "yes i had the oopportunity to buy 3 digit bitcoin and it was shilled to me daily, but i thought it was an indian scam until it reached 10k"

>> No.17051316

You just described Litecoin

>> No.17051365

>>17051307
Yes, but it's unironically thanks to brainlet cucks that many were able to buy at low prices. In any high IQ citadel world BSV would have been the minority fork - for about ten seconds max.

>> No.17051367

>>17051316
litecoin has a pump and dump scammer behind it who only took bitcoin source code and changed a couple constants.
Why invest in fake knock-off when you can buy the real deal

>> No.17051385

>>17051365
this is true, its kind of sad that not everyone can make it to the citadel, but i hope most people from /biz/ will, since they have been spoonfed the truth for months now... though i learned to never underestimate human stupidity.

As a high iq individual, sometimes i take intelligence for granted.

>> No.17051601

>>17051307
said every shitcoin shill ever yet nothing flipped btc so far not even close.

>> No.17051632

>>17051601
exactly, nothing will ever flip the one and only original, Bitcoin (sv).

The forked shitcoin segwit-corecuck-coin will soon dump to lower prices once more and more people realize its not the real bitcoin.

>> No.17051647

>>17051632
what bitcoin is:
- a trustless permissionless publicly auditable ledger that is also secure
- a non-custodial peer-to-peer electronic payment system
- a network of nodes enforcing a common ruleset shaping a common reality in a trustless manner
- the longest blockchain under the consensus ruleset with the largest commulative hash proven by a specific form of proof of work
- a protocol that describes how consensus is reached on ordering transactions and how difficulty and coinbase supply adjusts over time
- a greater consensus on the ruleset that governs the protocol
- a standard reference client implementation created by nakamoto and maintained as an open source project
- an unspent transaction output spendable to a script returning true

what bitcoin is not:
- a whitepaper
- a gargantuan garbage dump of stale data stored immutably forever
- whatever satoshi said in a forum post
- whatever faketoshi dreams up in delirium
- whatever sv jeets shrill and rave about currently

>> No.17051678

>>17051647
Oh what about the signatures? I thought part of the consensus was a chain of digital signatures?

If consensus described is broken it's not bitcoin isn't it?

Fork of a fork right?

So if Bitcoin is the master branch, and Blockstream created their own branch, made changes and then called it Bitcoin it's the master branch now yes?

retard

>> No.17051691

>>17051647
nice talking points greg.
COPE.

>> No.17051706

>>17051678
>digital coin is defined as a chain of digital signatures
a bitcoin is an utxo not a chain of signatures. nor was it ever since first release. satoshi wrote that paper in 2007 but in the first release he already added scripting and smart contract support.
>segwit breaks the chain of digital signatures
no. the witness is segregated to an extension block which is merely a transaction structuring decision with several obvious advantages but the signature is still there when it needs to be.
https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/9b0fc92260312ce44e74ef369f5c66bbb85848f2eddd5a7a1cde251e54ccfdd5
there is no chain of signatures it's just an utxo, but it takes a special kind of retard to say it's not bitcoin.

>> No.17051785

>>17051706
blah blah blah,

enjoy your 50$ transaction fees, corecuck. Im not gonna try to convince you. Some people deserve to lose their money.
This is a bsv-holder thread only

>> No.17051793

>>17051678
>If consensus described is broken it's not bitcoin isn't it?
that is correct however the consensus was broken by bch. the reason is twofold.
1) segwit was a soft fork, a stricter backwards compatible ruleset that by definition can not change the protocol nor in a technical nor in philosophical sense.
2) the nakamoto consensus started by satoshi himself with his bitcoin implementation only continues unbroken on the btc fork.

also here is a multi choice question:
what can you spend as per the bitcoin protocol?
a) signatures, bitcoin is a chain of signatures so i can spend signatures with signatures
b) an unspent transaction output provided you add a valid unlock script that executes to true
c) i'm a cashie retard so the whitepaper!

>> No.17051860

>>17051706
segwit literally removes the witness data from the transaction to increase tps. Even though it's still in use, the witness data is not on the blockchain you fucking liar.

>> No.17051913

>>17051793
It was a soft fork. Really? What the fuck does that even mean? It's backwards compatible? Then why can't you remove segwit without fucking up the chain you lying pos?

Oh you know why? Cause the witness data isn't on chain. Suck a dick fucking charlatan

>> No.17051933

SIRS PLEASE BUY BSV! MY SATCHEL IS HEAVY MY VILLAGE IS BANKRUPTED! BSV IS THE REAL BITCOIN SIRS

>> No.17051944

>>17051706
Reminder:
> The whole block size war happened only because Greg came up with his stupid plan to "save" bitcoin by forcing users to pay exorbitant fees, and saw the 1 MB limit as the way to do that -- he just had to convince everybody that it was a terribly critical parameter that could destroy bitcoin if it was raised even a little bit. And, unfortunately for "the community", he got 30 million USD to do that.
>Greg's "bitcoin 2.0" required a Layer 2 system to carry almost all payments. After sidechains were found to be unsuitable, the small-blockers adopted the LN. But the LN needed a fix to the malleability problem.
>SegWit was the solution that Blockstream devised for that -- a clever hack that could be delivered by soft fork. As such, the *activation* did not require convincing users; once 51% of the miners implemented it, everybody would have to accept it, even without being aware, however, *adoption* required users to agree to use SegWit when issuing transaction. To do that, Blockstream had to provide an incentive. They decided to charge only 1/4 the normal fee for any part of the transaction that was segregated to the extension record.
> But Greg's "bitcoin 2.0" design also required the miners to solve a knapsack problem when choosing which transactions of the mempool should go into their blocks. Namely, for the "fee market" to work, they would have to maximize the total fee, subject to block size limit.
That knapsack problem would be very difficult to solve if segregated bytes counted the same as non-segregated ones towards the block size limit. To make the problem tractable, it was necessary to count each segregated byte as 1/4 of a byte, just as when computing the fee.
>Then the old optimization heuristic could still be used. Namely, transactions are ordered in decreasing order of fee/weight ratio, and the top 1 MB of "weight" is put into the block.

>> No.17051956
File: 129 KB, 724x611, 1541690102185.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
17051956

>>17051647
>a gargantuan garbage dump of stale data stored immutably forever
lmao, it actually is
because it's all worthless tx going from exchange to wallet to exchange, it's literally useless
bsv will bring actual worthwhile use and facilitate trade between people for goods and services

>> No.17051995

>>17051793
>segwit was a soft fork, a stricter backwards compatible ruleset that by definition can not change the protocol nor in a technical nor in philosophical sense.

This is the most retarded thing ive ever heard. This is what corecucks retards actually believe.
"a stricter ruleset by definition is kot a change of the protocol!!!1!"

That argument only works for twitter fucktards idiot, dont try it here.

Sure lets play basketball, but now you can only use your left hand, you can only shoot from outside the three-point line, and you cannot make the ball bounce on the floor. HEY! This is still basketball! Its a stricter ruleset so its backwards compatible and it perfectly complies to the old basketball rules so by definition this new sport is basketball.

Thats how retarded you sound, bow fuck off back to twitter and keep hodling your shitcoin all the way to zero

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
reCAPTCHA
Action