Best devs in the world

Best devs in the world

Attached: btc.png (1116x828, 568K)

I'm glad i don't own that shitcoin. Talk about depressing.

What coin is this

>reducing blocksize

wew

store. of. value.

You shut your mouth

Attached: nG0da9fC.png (748x846, 757K)

some altcoin (pic related)

Attached: fatal_security_flaw.png (220x56, 3K)

they should make the blocksize 1KB... you cant sell if you cant send a transaction

ALL IN

Jesus. And who has a link to that stiffed website. Someone needs to tweet it at this sorry shitcoin team.

> STIFFED

based. then if you get hacked its not like the hacker can spend your funds.

Sounds a lot better than "we will put the internet on bitcoin as a sidechain" or "because the transactions are so many, privacy will be really good"

How could anything compete with this?

Attached: 1544177537980.png (1200x818, 171K)

fucking cringe

Attached: 1543883028353.jpg (598x554, 20K)

How do you do fellow cultist

Attached: 1541574045195.jpg (500x500, 47K)

>turing-like flexibility

Attached: 1544141808407.jpg (898x509, 38K)

Thy steal code from Monero look :
> Confidential Transaction.

Attached: 1527821347026.jpg (500x500, 44K)

just fucking increase the fucking blocksize already ffs

with the tumult happening in the Bitcoin Cash space right now BTC has literally been given a second chance to redeem themselves and win back almost all the people they lost.

just fucking increase it NOW before it really is too late. hard forking is CLEARLY not a valid excuse since 100% of the miners and exchanges upgraded immediately last year when that critical bug was found.

Attached: The Burdens of Triumph.jpg (1600x2400, 739K)

i'm BSV, not some cringe lolbertarian bcasher

no. at least that is an ambition that would add value to the world. can you imagine how many more tx/s it would create if it would actually be achievable? meanwhile reducing the block size limit and calling it "making bitcoin sustainable" is the dumbest thing to do right now. imagine end of 2017 but the fees would be ten times higher and the loss of adoption going five times faster, that's what the BTC devs appear to be wanting.

if OP is true, i hope not

Attached: grr.jpg (1820x1024, 488K)

Holy newfag. Adam Back was the first to talk about ct on bitcointalk, gmax was the guy who did most of the initial work. Monero didn't have ct at first and gmax helped them implement it.
Blockstream were part of the bulletproofs authors and monero took their work.

Nah. Signature aggregation and batch verification is all that's needed right now. Much more than bigger blocks.
Most of the blockspace is used by exchanges with huge transactions that have 10+ multisig inputs. Plus the current max blocksize of 1.9-3 mb hasn't even been reached yet.

> maybe perhaps we can fix some bugs? possibly in the future?

L

Attached: 1544176453946.png (1200x825, 215K)

O

Attached: 1544170859214.png (1742x998, 624K)

L.

Attached: 1543265900118.jpg (1200x869, 209K)

>thinking you know more than one of cryptocurrencies biggest contributors
>being so shortsighted you can’t see the potential problems large blocks create

Theres a reasom you fucking dunces are shitposting on Jow Forums and Luke is a top Bitcoin developer.

Hardfork is the most valid reason not to. I like that its immutable and doesn't change. Plus I'm still making transactions at 1 sat.

Attached: 1542990624395.png (550x555, 69K)

Attached: 1542554624791.png (1025x648, 624K)

good fucking lord, king shitcoin

Serious question how much money have you lost in the last few days?