BSV metanet

shoo shoo pajeet

Attached: 1531287551592.jpg (688x696, 128K)

that's a con not a pro

>its not turning complete because it doesn't compute infinitely, just like every other computer

actually a finite turing completeness requires it to be able to perform/emulate the instructions of any turing complete language so that's a bust too. alternatively call me back when you have a javasript eval function written in solely bitcoin script!

It's immutable, decentralized and subject to economic incentives. It's the perfect archive that is impossible to censor because it stores EVERYTHING on the Bitcoin blockchain.

It is also instant due to 0-conf, and it already exists and works, try it out with this simple proof-of-concept service

etched.page/

With an example:
etched.page/00c7d5a583cca8777148e9f7000b5b0062e5e4dcba3aff6297796532cdd9b486

Attached: metanet_capitalism_for_the_internet.jpg (1436x1734, 538K)

>both are immutable
wtf are you talking about?

Anyway with blockchain you only need to do an input once and pay a small fee and its there forever. You also don't have to maintain a database or pay yearly subscriptions or deal with security.

>It's immutable, decentralized and subject to economic incentives
so are cloud storage providers if you retrieve your data by hash nobody can alter it it's immutable. we don't need all this bitcoin nonsense for that.

>wtf are you talking about?
i'm talking about how technically all you need for a file to be practically immutable is to hash it. every fucking body and his mother used this simple trick the past 40 years. blockchain is a timestamping (aka transaction ordering in bitcoin) mechanism proof of work is specifically a trustless permissionless timestamping mechanism. it has a purpose it's not fucking immuteable file storeage.

>Anyway with blockchain you only need to do an input once and pay a small fee and its there forever. You also don't have to maintain a database or pay yearly subscriptions or deal with security.
that's why i said abstraction layer that you can pay in doge coins dollars get some for free whatever.

Just because you hash something doesn't mean you can have access to it when all your cloudstorage providers get wiped. Also paying multiple providers to store some files for you for years on end is going to be far more expensive and less secure than just using the fucking blockchain.

>abstraction layer that you can pay in doge coins dollars get some for free whatever
Not sure what you're talking about.

Also, we mooning boys!

Attached: 1556723352047.jpg (602x800, 116K)

>Just because you hash something doesn't mean you can have access to it when all your cloudstorage providers get wiped.
exactly thank you and this is why sv is shit because even it's advocates admit you gonna have to rely on services to retrieve your data nobody will be able to run a full node at home there was insane screeching about how this is a good and desired thing here for months.

>Not sure what you're talking about.
let's call it an api service even a distributed one like a shitcoin for simplicity sake that hides the subscriptions and multiple cloud providers behind that do the redundant storeage.

It's a database and a time stamp and a processor and a cache. Stop thinking about the blockchain exclusively and instead all the operations miners do as a giant super computer you can piggy back on with a pay per use model. No one needs a computer then anymore.

>nobody will be able to run a full node at home
Nobody runs a full node at home. I hate to current year, but its literally 2019.

Attached: 9207.jpg (600x400, 71K)

MINISTER YOU, SATOSHI

Attached: 1479854979248.gif (800x800, 2M)

>far more expensive and less secure than just using the fucking blockchain
not really no, and definite no on the more secure, and yeah nobody will want to wait 10-60 minutes after pushing the save button to make sure his document is all safe and secure before shutting down his computer. that's hilarious.

Based

i'm specifically talking about the metanet as "an immutable store of everything" being not needed not a good idea not efficient not reasonable here.

any thoughts on that? because we have bitcoin for you know the money thing, and we have cloud services for the immutable redundant insanely fast file storeage thing. and the two does not have to do anything with each other unless you force them for no reason.

Nope, cloud storage is completely centralized, it's stored on actual servers of a company with an owner. It can be seized, censored, deleted or shut down.

Learn what a Blockchain is retard.

Imagine caring about BSV when Unwriter verifiably cucked by SNTVT lead dev.

hint, SNTVT is a the next web.

>Nope, cloud storage is completely centralized
so will be sv if we get to giga/terra-byte blocks no worries. even sv cucks admit this hell they say it's natural.

>and yeah nobody will want to wait 10-60 minutes after pushing the save button to make sure his document is all safe and secure before shutting down his computer. that's hilarious.

Corecucks are severely damaged. How can they still not understand. After 10 fucking years.

Attached: Satoshi fast transactions.png (1848x354, 40K)

Attached: 1556135346234.jpg (1280x720, 136K)

>Learn what a Blockchain is retard.
right back at you mong! come back when you actually learn what blockchain is and why t is used despite all it's insane shortcomings and bottleneck.

>scaling centralizes mining

Compete, join a pool or find a new fucking job, cunt.

you are not sure your document is saved until it's on the blockchain you can have it in the mempool that's not the same as saved on disks on 5 continents and acknowledged back in an instant.

not mining specifically full nodes the ones that could possibly make the data retrieval private and permissionless.

I'd like you to explain to me how that transaction isn't going to be in the next block when the mempool never gets backed up because its cleared every transaction and Bitcoin has literally never gone offline.

All you need are blockheaders. Those nodes are specifically for personal use. They don't contribute to the network in any way. Satoshi explained this in the whitepaper and predicted they could be run in fucking RAM for the foreseeable future and he's right. Because you still can.

im still talking about the metanet thing here please dont deflect!

full block validation vs block header validation is a different issue but the main problem with pruning nodes is they cant as of now partake in syncing the network especially new nodes.

False, the network is decentralized as long as shutting down specific actors or nodes does not compromise the data or security.

It's impossible to shut down the Bitcoin network this way, and the bigger the network gets, the harder it becomes. Cloud storage is easy just, go to the owners house, put him in cuffs and shut down the servers. Data GONE. Or the one with server access shuts it down himself.

CENTRAL POINT OF FAILURE - the fucking physical server the data is stored on.

On Bitcoin every single node has a fucking copy. Do you not understand how any of this works?

I'm so brownpilled that I need antibiotics.

Attached: 1milliongigamegs.jpg (1280x720, 106K)

your data will soon be served by nchain alone and you know it

>On Bitcoin every single node has a fucking copy.
on bitcoin yes on sv nope shit bot gonna fly if it sees any adoption in this full retard direction.

Attached: 1557935482506.jpg (657x561, 30K)

Will it provide gay love for all?

Attached: 1558903369376.jpg (1024x764, 83K)

>im still talking about the metanet thing here please dont deflect!
Yeah so was I. Metanet is still transactions, dummy.

You sync with the network via miners. I'm not going to argue about you're retarded raspberry pi node. If you haven't gotten by now you're not going to and its all so tiresome to explain this shit for the billionth time on Jow Forums. So here's some nChain propaganda that just came out, for (You).

Attached: nChain Scaling.jpg (519x423, 152K)

People won't have to wait that long. You send it to the blockchain, see it received, ping another couple random miners and see if they have it in the mempool and then now you're basically guaranteed it's gonna be in a block.

It is cloud storage, cloud computing, cloud hosting, the blockchain is the database, the miners run script, gpus crawl the database and deliver content through css or html. Look up what an economy of scale is. Bitcoin creates economies of scale around complete computing. Everyone having their own 12 core, 10TB SSD, 128GB RAM computer is highly inefficient when they only use it occasionally. Why not just pay per cycle to a service that you know is under ruthless competition in the small world network of the bitcoin network graph.

What you are saying is yeah I get that everything else should be done on there but not why the internet should be... Because everything else is done on there. Having them all interact seemlessly and miners able to prune the blockchain for trash while other storage services operate at scale that will host the entire blockchain.

out of arguments? ok thx bye!

miners are as centralized as cloud storeage there is no difference except efficiency flexibility performance is all on the cloud side.

Those Bitcoin scams get worse with every fork. I though BCash was bad but this whole "I'm Satoshi, buy my shit" cringefest is the worst. This is Ripple/Tron tier.

>miners are as centralized as cloud storeage
I can't do this with your retards anymore. Just enjoy poverty.

Attached: 1515128793888.gif (645x773, 41K)

>the blockchain is the database
the worst database ever concieved generally yes thats my point pow blockchaoms ar eone trock ponoes they do something no other datase can do you cant force them on other scenarios.

fuck
*pow blockchains are one trick ponies

truth hurts? i know... there are what like 10 major cloud providers and 10 major mining pools?

You don't even understand what a Blockchain is LMAO, literally just a retarded core cuck brainlet paid to spread disinfo.

Attached: 3433213431.jpg (1024x576, 131K)

What do you think is easier. Wiping data from AWS or Bitcoin?

You don't force them, you pay them, they compete, services get cheaper. That's capitalism bruz. Don't like it?
S
T
I
F
F

Attached: 1557927608596.jpg (1760x1850, 1.3M)

Based

Attached: 1556662674221.jpg (704x757, 47K)

that's why i said with multiple cloud storage providers via an abstraction layer you have the exact same decentralization as with bitcoin. (not sv, sv is nowhere near as decentralized and it will get worse)

there is no need for a blockchain if you just want to store files in datacenters. there never was.

learn to read and comprehend!

weird how there are multiple mining operations competing fiercely to be the first one to win the rights to write that data permanently and immutably to the blockchain

>there's no need

I don't give a fuck about what you think I need, commie faggot. If I want my desktop to be stored on the fucking blockchain so I can go anywhere and always have my PC then I will.

if you insist go ahead... i'm just saying that this is probably one of the worst solutions ever conceived. and trying to sell it off as revolutionary is just plain retarded.

Attached: 1559110832136.jpg (1280x720, 230K)

what did i tell you about idiotic memeing aside let's have a discussion? is basically just idiotic memeing every character of it.

>I feel for the satoj meme

once you see what bitcoin is capable of as the world computer you will see that nation-states will compete fiercely to be the next one to write exabyte+ sized blocks to the chain.

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-05-12 at 7.39.56 AM.jpg (798x659, 83K)

10 MINUTES BLOCKTIME!!!

WORLD COMPUTER MY FUCKING ASS

Transactions are instant with 0-conf, something that core coin also killed.

Deal with it, your shitcoin is being left behind.

Pass

payment channels are peer to peer and as fast as your network internnection link allows for. in 20 years time your network connection will outpace the data throughput capacity of your local storage by orders of magnitude. all memes aside, get STIFF'd

0 conf is only for your wallet to show the transaction... you faggot

it still needs 1 confirmation for you to spend the transaction again . try it foryourself with
3 wallets

core didn't kill 0-conf it never really worked securely. that is why we have this thing called confirmations. rbf just makes it a childs play to double spend but double spending is not particularly difficult without it. you could always accept transactions with no rbf flag as 0-conf if you are retarded enough.

okay send me some bsv through your payment channel ill wait

1PeF67i39exfV2t1j3gkifiWvpMKMS4WR7

Attached: lets see.png (830x313, 25K)

ok they had 2 blocks in the last 6 minutes what almost never happend before

forgot pic

Attached: 2222.png (839x425, 29K)

Exactly

Attached: 1558825515067.png (1200x603, 437K)

>high fees and 10 minute settlements is a good thing!

i never said i liked high fees, but there is some rationale behind them.

basically there are two competing long term scaling solutions right now:
1 put every fucking thing on a single blockchain that gets so bloated that nobody but datacenters can deal with it directly.
2 let's keep the main net slim and focus on it's primary purpose of being a computationally secure trustless permissionless ledger and can have a wide ecosystem of tree structured other chains often with specialized features or turing complete scripting or whatever for everyday transactions and they can anchor to their parent and finally to btc blockchain against hostile reorgs and to have been rooted firmly in the shared reality.

and here is the thing. one chain can never outperform and outdo a thousand. it will be a dinosaur in every which way stiffling development competing ideas making it impossible that anyone deal with only the things he cares about the traditional permissionless and private way.

but both can scale to roughly the same tx/sec overall.

And why do i need more than? Im 70% btc / 30% btc core now

user....havent you learned your lesson from bcashies? It was .36btc at one point - look at it now...all forks are retarded

You realize that WAY BACK in fucking 2010 Satoshi himself posted about how 0-conf is guaranteed to be safe within just a few seconds.

All a merchant needs to do is scan nodes for an attempted double spend within the first 5 seconds. BCH made payment apps that already do this.

Can't believe after 10 fucking years people don't even understand how Bitcoin works and what it is capable of.

>Eliminating the need for trust is one of the worst solutions

Holy shit you absolute brainlets make my head hurt.

satoshi specifically said 0-conf is never a good idea unless you can cancel the order/subscription to no cost to you at all.

you don't get it, sv will not be a trustless permissionless file storage any more than any cloud provider is today. you either make it truly permisisonless and trustless and immutable in which case it will be chock full of illegal content, or you make it government friendly and censor it in which case it's no better than cloud storage but worse in many ways. there is no middle ground here.

as for transactions the intended use as money btc is the only one trustless permissionless publicly auditable ledger to date that is actually secure. sv and bch are not secure evident by recent 51 on bch. it's never a good idea to have 2 pow chains of the same family. it's probably not a good idea to have 2 pow chains at all. we could do with 1 and that 1 will not be sv i absolutely fucking guarantee you that.

You say we can go up to 0.36??? Holy moly need my paycheck now

Objectively false.

if i want lower fees I can use ethereum, LTC, bcash or even doge
you have nothing

the miners and the nodes are the database you incredulous fuck
BSV mines on a loss too
your immutable metanet is a delusion AND useless

satoshi himself said that bitcoin should be used to pay for hosting

Nah, we just use Bitcoin (BSV), keep your shitcoins.

Attached: 1548457271334.jpg (1280x784, 113K)

it's funny how sv cucks just want to lock down the base protocol when btc pretty much already did with bip16.

HOW MAD ARE THE CORE KEKS RIGHT NOW HAHAHAHAHA GET FUCKED

Attached: BSV_MOONING.png (1542x646, 58K)

But Ethereum is technically better than BSV and it is not led by a proven document forger. If BTC goes down ETH is the obvious alternative.

It's funny cause it's not true
BTC = Fraud
BSV = Bitcoin

Hahahahahaha, etherium can't scale and run by literal booger eaters.

It's a shitcoin for retards, fitting that you would like it.

Attached: Vitalik Buterin smearing his Ethereum booger on your wall.webm (426x240, 775K)

>0.017

Attached: sn1.png (919x907, 65K)

did u even read what you posted? that it literally craig wright talking about bsv

It wasn't a discussion, it was ne spoonfeeding you while you went "nah sounds stupid"

I don't owe you shit to answer your basic bitch objections. Do some reading, listen to shadders, follow unwriter, read craig's medium or get rekt.

Luke Dash and other core guys still bamboozle us like we’re all on 56k modems. Bigger blocks is not just the future, it’s the present.