People think they’re buying Bitcoin when they buy BTC, but in reality they’re just buying a fake airdrop. BSV is Bitcoin

May 21

Attached: May15.jpg (798x436, 53K)

let's be real for a moment.

Will unlimited block size work? It'll be a bit centralized, sure, but too centralized? Doubt it.

Stores accepting the coin would have to rely on centralized payment hubs too (like they already do now)

My thoughts exactly!

>If he were Satoshi he would just follow Core and bank on profits instead of doing all this mess "to save the whitepaper bitcoin".

It's not Bitcoin if it's not getting attacked constantly.
coinspice.io/news/counterpunch-developer-swipes-bch-attackers-funds-right-under-their-noses/

Attached: blockstreamvsbsv.jpg (1270x700, 379K)

>I have 1,200,000,000 BTC coins locked in a Vishnu Fund.
>Bend the knee to me or lose your heads.

WAT? So the bch devs can literally steal peoples funds? Please tell me it is not so

I just read some articles on bitcoin wiki and I'm a Core shill now. segwit is good, but I don't get what the point of lightning network is. Great, you can make transactions in a LN hub for free, but it costs a tx fee to join it, so what's the point?
If I start a 1v1 hub, then can people join that hub after, without it being closed and re-opened? Then it would make sense

Coinspice is Roger's propaganda outlet. Nobody attacked Amaury just sucks at writing code, that bug was there since the last hard fork

faketoshi btfo

The centralized argument is a bit silly, considering more decentralization is not necessarily always better. You just need sufficient decentralization to remove the ability of one centralized power center, actor, organization or institution to make decisions.

A simple concept illustration in pic related shows this idea pretty well. There aren't that many nodes total, but in a geopolitical sense it is totally decentralized. You don't need a million nodes, you just need enough to disperse power among many disparate actors, and interests with no central point of failure or control.

This was the design of Bitcoin to begin with, it was always meant to end up in large datacentres.

In this world you can imagine that governments, universities, businesses and corporations, scientific and research institutions and of course some hobbyists all will run nodes. This will result in 100s if not 1000s in each every country. That is decentralized enough, you don't need every person with a PC to run it to achieve the decentralization goals.

Attached: decentralized.jpg (483x275, 43K)

yes, goy, just forget all that decentralization argument. having like 10 nodes (all controlled by the gods chosen people ofc) is, like, totally decentralized. i mean, could you even imagine someone like uncle sam shutting inconvenient nodes down in another country? its, like, totally impossible!

daily reminder that nodes dont verify transactions. miners do. the entire "hurr durr muh centralization" argument from blockstream shills is a moot point

I read the wiki and it said trustlessness (and decentralization) is bitcoin's value proposition. I can agree with that.

but yeah, this is true too. miners only need to hold on to a few blocks at a time.

Satoshi have no control of the GitHub repository and even if he came back and everybody knew he was in fact Satoshi he would still need to convince everybody to upgrade (including Blockstream, who has ulterior motives).

Seeing as it's well known that Satoshi always intended for 1 MB to be temporary but nobody on BTC gives a shit about his will he probably would need to fork.

Attached: eyes.jpg (925x1213, 428K)

Stores accepting the coin directly would need nodes. But I agree it's a moot point because it's a fantasy scenario, right?

Imagine how brainlet Amaury is

>make new op code nobody wants
>introduce catastrophic vulnerability

Ahahaaa

I am talking about 10.000-100.000 nodes spread out in 200 countries faggot.

You can keep your 6 gorillion nodes running on little brothers Gameboy, the technology won't be held back by plebs thinking they make a difference.

don't they need nodes in core too, though? Your local 7/11 isn't gonna run its own node in any reality. and I can imagine walmart running its own nodes and possibly a business around access to those nodes.

right. blockstream has given up on the original idea as defined in teh whitepaper a long time ago. bitcoin core is no longer "p2p decentralized cash". theyre trying to turn it into "digital gold" which serves no purpose whatsoever. theyre on record saying you should just pay with VISA instead. thank god we have BSV the original Bitcoin

They're using centralized hubs that redeem the coins through Bitfinex. Not a very "peer-to-peer" solution considering that your merchant account can be arbitrarily shut down for some political bullshit.

How does BSV solve the problem of small stores running their own nodes? By forcing them to synchronize with this whole instagram-on-blockchain bullshit?

yeah, so it's no different then? replace walmart with bitfinex

So, no peer-to-peer again?

SPV clients

medium.com/@craig_10243/the-myth-of-the-full-validation-node-d7db52748649

it's peer to peer except for confirming. and do you even need a full node to confirm transactions? I don't think you do? just hold like 10 blocks, that should be possible for just about anyone

big blocked and protocolpilled

nvm, I think you should need the full chain after all. didn't read craig's medium ramblings though

you only need the headers.

>I think you should need the full chain after all
You don't. If you don't want to read craig's article for wathever reason, you can at leasr read about SPV wallets in the whitepaper. You can also read the Satoshi posts on bitcointalk

How can that be? The headers don't have the transactions, so how could you tell where coins are?
I'll read it, but craig's tales are so convoluted it'll take a long moment

sorry merkle branches

if you find craig difficult to listen to shadders does pretty good explanations

WTF he really died

Right, so I think a store wants the headers to confirm that a chain is the longest, then hold on to like 10 to 30 blocks of that chain, and simply observe which transactions get accepted and trust that there's a few full nodes somewhere that would toss out all bad transactions. So then there's no need for the store to hold on to the full chain

I'll humor you. Let's say I wanted to buy BSV, I can't because it is not on a single reputable exchange. Explain why not a single decent exchange will list this.

bittrex and polo are regulatory compliant I believe.

>BSV
cringe

It's all so tiresome.

>BSV shill threads are back

Aaaand the bear market is back.

so I read it and it was like my thoughts here except with this "thing" added
>Over the next 12 months, I will be documenting at least 100 ways in which BTC can be subverted, before I get to the final one that, with the introduction of SegWit, cannot be fixed.
kek
segwit seems pretty good to me, desu. but I can't rule out BSV, it seems like it really could work. People (core people) seem to fear using computing power and storage, don't know why.

Fucktard fyi hubs arent onchain and even if its "centralized" its still permission less.
But you already knew that

Attached: 0013[1].jpg (720x573, 18K)

>mfw there are people who still think anything besides BTC has a future
>mfw they don't know

Attached: c0c.jpg (634x650, 45K)

Why would anyone invest in a coin backed by Pajeet shilling instead of buying something with a real underlying tech like Zil?

Attached: blockstreamsvision.jpg (1023x576, 108K)

At least FUD properly, brainlets.

May 21
just wait

Attached: may 21.jpg (718x120, 26K)

Sure, we'll see if i spam the fork out of BullShitVentures

Yeah and come may 21 it'll be may 27. What happened to may 11, may 15 or may 17? How many more key dates do we need before you sell your bags?

did the aus LARP make it back to court? did he find his super secret documents that totally will convince everyone of something that will only be believed with on method of confirmation

SIGN SOMETHING WITH THE SATOSHI WALLET

Blockstream makes sense when you realize that their goal is actually to PREVENT Bitcoin from scaling.

So many newfags are going to lose everything because they understand nothing.

Attached: lukejr_reduce_blocksize.png (635x500, 51K)

thanks pajeet just bought 100k

yes and especially if you look at (((who))) pays blockstreams salaries. they set back BTC development for years and crippled it, basically making it unuseable. second layer scaling solutions like LN open the door to all kinds of fuckery. its about control and monies, as usual.

Who’s that?

>its about control and monies, as usual.
You summed up nChain perfectly.

Someone said you claimed you’re mostly in fiat. You don’t put your money where your mouth is?

>logo is literally a dragon eating it's tail forming a 8

>doesn't understand traffic stop signs of reality.

Attached: 3646350_orig.jpg (1100x534, 150K)

It certainly doesn’t form an 8. If anything it’s a 0

Based

Attached: CA53C9E2-39A7-4F57-B6B3-DF7E62AA46DC.jpg (750x886, 476K)

I actually agree with core. Smaller blocks are better in the long run, you can't realistically even deny that. 1mb blocks are the future, and if lightning network isn't fucked, then bitcorn is saved.

Yikes

Bitcoin SV, like BCH, is owned by AXA and the Bilderberg Group

Proof? Oh you have none

Yeh lets let mom n pop stores all store petabytes and exabytes of information. Great idea, if youre a retard.

2 or 3 big miners globally is unironically enough. Centralization fears are unironically for spineless cucks.

Why don't you like EOS, then?

Miners offer this service to merchants. Connect to a miner and pay a fee for the service. Or accept a coin nobody gives a shit about, except of 4 neckbeard cryptotards

well fren, that’s just your opinion.

The market thinks otherwise. So fuck off

Just a reminder that BTC is #1, BCH is #4 and BSV.............. is #14

LOLIKOKKIKKUOLOLIKILOOLOLOL

SOLID KEK

kys faggot, fuck you and all the faketoshi supporters

This is full retard, the post

Attached: 1550613751990.png (1743x1609, 524K)

Fake and gay, worthless FUD.

nChain was founded and funded entirely by Satoshi

Attached: 1558022473668.jpg (500x833, 325K)

Attached: m35.png (802x534, 6K)

Nobody cares if they are buying the “real” bitcoin or not. All that matters is if they will make money... BSV will not make money.

At least he knows the difference between bits and bytes

Third world exchanges where tickets bounce around all day are not real markets

Topkek

No, shut the fuck up fag, everyone has to be able to run a full node on a shitty 10 year old laptop. Otherwise it's too centralised and all the people paying >$50 per transaction might as well be using PayPal if they want centralisation. Seriously just stop trying to make bitcoin more centralised and use lightning network like how it's supposed to work

Tickers*

Pls use l-btc

Attached: 9C4C265C-8D02-4255-A851-241D5C532877.jpg (1242x1735, 247K)

>If something that isn't bitcoin works, bitcoin is saved because people can use that instead of bitcoin

Why don't you BSV fags simply embrace EOS? It's exactly like your "vision", just better at literally everything.

Can you imagine the USA uses BTC, china uses BCH, and India uses BSV?

I'll let you in on a little secret, and also a small financial tip.

The only blockchain state actors will use is one that can scale to global levels and support national/international economies. There is no ifs or buts, it's just a fact of life.

Whichever version of Bitcoin scales first, wins. Good luck.

Attached: D3Dw7h1WsAATVSC.png (765x515, 45K)