BTC, BCH and BSV fags get in here. It's time to think about what we're truly involved in...

>Even if bsv wins, it's not a store of value and thus it won't "win". It will need something else to act as the store value. That means either gold or BTC will be what actually moons in that event.

Bitcoin only has value as a side effect of its utility being valuable, not simply that fact that you can HODL it, BTC has extremely limited utility and therefore can never have real value.

Attached: icedragon_T2NH79RJOK.png (482x361, 26K)

The strangest thing I've noticed about bsv is it's connection to what is essentially the anglo empire. It's main figureheads are from former british colonies and nChain is centered in the UK currently.

if satoshi meant the protocol should not be changed he would have written that, however the consensus of the network decides whether protocol changes are accepted or not, you actual brainlet. whereas changing the core design would break btc and thus satoshi saying it was set in stone as a fact, not how it should be.

Literally just move your coins once every 50 years and you'll be fine

Treasure hunting by mining inactive addresses is perfectly acceptable (this wont be possible for at least decades)

Attached: goldbar.jpg (961x721, 153K)

That could be true. It's essentially a gated investment. If BSV wins though it'll need an instrument to act as a store of value though. So it would most likely be BTC or gold. BCH will be highly deflationary if it could be used in a larger scale.

>if satoshi meant the protocol should not be changed he would have written that

He did

>however the consensus of the network decides whether protocol changes are accepted or not, you actual brainlet.

This was always intended to be for network upgrades or emergency bug fixes

>whereas changing the core design would break btc and thus satoshi saying it was set in stone as a fact, not how it should be.

"The nature of Bitcoin is such that once version 0.1 was released, the core design was set in stone for the rest of its lifetime." - Satoshi Nakamoto

I kinda doubt they meant that in the way you're perceiving it. The concept they're alluding to is known as a demurrage currency or also known as freigeld.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freigeld

you are an obvious bcash shill. i at least hold core because of its network effects but bcash? lmao

you do realize schnor transactions are optional right? bsv isnt monero where everything is hidden by default. bch can still operate within the law. in fact schnor sigs were needed for tokenization and smart constracts. bsv will never have either of those. also schnor sigs were implemented in the last fork and so far bch is still live on coinbase. government doesn't seem to give a shit.

I actually own all three, plus litecoin and some gold. I don't put all my eggs in one basket. It just dawned on me earlier though that the dynamic between these three is different than what I initially thought.

>If BSV wins though it'll need an instrument to act as a store of value though. So it would most likely be BTC or gold.

What on earth does BTC have that makes it a store of value that BSV doesn't have? It's literally crippled and useless, you've been fed propaganda for years by the people who crippled it

>BCH will be highly deflationary if it could be used in a larger scale.

A currency with a fixed total quantity cannot ever be inflationary or deflationary

I hodl one of each and plan on financing my permaNEEThood by selling LTC, XMR, and ETH.

>how can something with no value be a store of value?
Nothing has inherent value. Something only becomes valuable if large groups of people agree that it has value.

It could be a secondary coin that can't be mined if you leave sitting in a wallet. Thus it could potentially be a store of value.

DSV opens up the possibilites for illegal bucket shops and illegal assassination markets inside the BCH code, that makes the miners of BCH liable

The BSV miners are immune to whatever happens on the BSV blockchain because the protocol itself is legal, everything built on BSV is built on top of the network not inside it

>government doesn't seem to give a shit.
Because white paper hasn't patented yet.

Yeah I agree. It's a pretty close race between BSV and BCH so far. BSV has been striving to catch up for sure.

Exactly, value is subjective, only BSV can achieve mass adoption, the crippled nature of BTC and the illegal nature of BCH preclude them from mass adoption

>It could be a secondary coin that can't be mined if you leave sitting in a wallet. Thus it could potentially be a store of value.

Why would anyone want to buy it from you? Use your brain

>DSV opens up the possibilites for illegal bucket shops and illegal assassination markets inside the BCH code, that makes the miners of BCH liable
I bet this is something you heard from Craig. It's exactly the kind of delusional shit he says and then hysterically denies he ever said 2 months later.

If bsv wins, and is made into a demurrage currency, you will lose your value by holding onto bsv. From what I can gather, that thing where it was said that inactive wallets can be mined, was a nod to it not being a store of value. I don't know for sure though. That's why I'm trying to see what the other people think.

>"The nature of Bitcoin is such that once version 0.1 was released, the core design was set in stone for the rest of its lifetime." - Satoshi Nakamoto
>whereas changing the core design would break btc and thus satoshi saying it was set in stone as a fact, not how it should be.

please read his sentence and my explanation until you understand it, might require basic english so maybe ask the faggot you shill for further training

Bitcoin was carefully designed to be legal and conform to legislation, it's why it's still around today, by opening up the code for developers to play around with you ruin that perfect design, OP_DATASIGVERIFY added by BCH developers makes Bitcoin illegal

coingeek.com/legal-risks-adding-op_datasigverify-bch-protocol/

pretty sure hitman can be paid in bsv as well... in fact when paying for illegal goods and services nothing beats good old untraceable cash.

Wrong af

BSV metanet has more useful uses than anything

Infact the more it's used the more value

It is a store of value dip shot

>pretty sure hitman can be paid in bsv as well...

They can be paid in USD, EUR and GBP too

>in fact when paying for illegal goods and services nothing beats good old untraceable cash.

Bitcoin keeps an immutable record of all transactions, you have no idea what you're talking about

Yeah but an immutable ledger will lead back to the tx and they will be accountable for the deed

I noticed this a few weeks ago, the full time shills employed by the government abandoned defending Blockstream and attacking crypto in general and moved to promote BSV. This is going to be beautiful to watch.

Attached: joker.jpg (425x337, 33K)

You don't understand what I'm saying.

>From what I can gather, that thing where it was said that inactive wallets can be mined
Such an obvious pilpul

BTC will win because the richest people owns it and want it to win, and Lightning Network is just one of many solutions.

BTC can be use to back other things, like banks, or tokens, through smart contracts. It doesn't need to move to back those other things. There is going to be an EOS based scaling solution for BTC for example, backed by almost 200k BTC owned by B1.

>Bitcoin was carefully designed to be legal
No it wasn't, to begin with every authority considered it illegal just like e-gold which was shut down in 2008. The ENTIRE POINT was to make a decentralized currency so government couldn't shut it down, at least not easily. Every single thing Craig has ever said is bullshit.

If you're against things like decentralized gambling and "bucket shops" which were always obvious results of the technology you're nothing but a government shill working to destroy crypto.

Well then if bsv wins. hoard the shit out of it. I'm not trying to convince you, I'm asking people if they think that demurrage the point of what they meant by wallet mining.

>No it wasn't, to begin with every authority considered it illegal just like e-gold which was shut down in 2008. The ENTIRE POINT was to make a decentralized currency so government couldn't shut it down, at least not easily.

(Forum poster) "The developers expect that this will result in a stable-with-respect-to-energy currency outside the reach of any government."

-- I am definitely not making an such taunt or assertion. (Satoshi Nakamoto)

Attached: icedragon_rO3xKl3DSr.png (812x486, 40K)

they aren't rich they are mostly early adopters who held and a few bigshot investors. it's literally just the same whales shuffling coins around in a cricle pretending theirs a market. it's all fake volume. in fact any real tx is being offloaded onto bch because not even btc whales are dumb enough to pay those outrageous fees.

>BTC will win because the richest people owns it and want it to wi
That's wishful thinking. Practicaly all the OGs I know moved to other coins.

can't tell if braindead or just really bad at reading comprehension.

If Google used all their current technology to mine your address it would take them 104 years, if you moved your Bitcoin 1 year before 2123 they would have to start all over again, don't be an imbecile

Attached: 330px-IBM_Blue_Gene_P_supercomputer.jpg (330x219, 23K)

>i'm not taunting authorities to shut it down
In your delusional schizo mind this means something completely different. The fact is Bitcoin would have been shut down like e-gold if not for the decentralized mining spread across the world. Facts don't matter to you only braindead fantasies. I don't hate you because you like big blocks or whatever. I despise you because you're a cancer spreading delusions.

Bitcoin is not untraceable, it's not designed to be, it's private not anonymous, what don't you understand?

why is everyone so obsessed with the word decentralized? if you mean decentralization of power you are incredibly naive. if anything has value be it a country, technology whatever, someone will ALWAYS try to control it. the difference is the direction of leadership

>what they meant by wallet mining
Read what craig said, not what some core coiner wants you to believe he said. If you don't have the ability to think for yourself and do your own research you will not last very long in this space. You will go bankrupt

never said it was dude. again. i think your reading comprehension just sucks...

Why do you still argue with those low IQ brainlets here? They obviously have no idea what they are talking about. What the fuck is the obsession with StoRe oF VaLuE.
Reading this thread confirmed my investment decision to go all in BSV

>In your delusional schizo mind this means something completely different. The fact is Bitcoin would have been shut down like e-gold if not for the decentralized mining spread across the world. Facts don't matter to you only braindead fantasies. I don't hate you because you like big blocks or whatever. I despise you because you're a cancer spreading delusions.

Attached: icedragon_9ynRYuoZpL.png (741x445, 64K)

Cringe.

Attached: icedragon_pwmQC8MRQK.png (882x80, 9K)

BSV glows like a radiated asshole of the people of Hiroshima. The way I see it is the CIA started bitcoin. It grew in popularity which was not expected or at least much faster. Bunch of new developers get involved and essentially push the CIAs influence out of their own creation. Now they can either launch a staggering campaign to reign control over the developers, which would be absurdly risky on their end, or they can use their puppet CSW as well as the full legal force of the U.S. government to ensure their coin dominates. Notice how once the 'individual number one' link became clear CSW started shilling BSV as the government friendly coin?

Funny, practically all the OGs I know currently moved out of other coins to BTC.

FUCK THE SYSTEM!!!!!

It’s pretty obvious that very few of you paid any attention to the CoinGeek conference, during which the BSV price doubled

People actually excited to build real shit on top of a stable protocol

Good fucking luck trying any of that with BTC or shitcoins that can’t scale

And if you shill against the conference your opinion is less than worthless

UptimeSV (Hackathon winners) is a more useful application (and further along) than 99% of other coins lol

For every 1 poster there are probably 10 lurkers, I want to reach out and help the people who aren't low IQ brainlets

Honestly I'm not sure what you mean. He didn't exactly state how they'd access your wallet anyhow. It just seemed like an odd thing to suggest. If he just meant mining what are potentially lost coins then I'm not against what he said.

Smart OGs are still in BTC which is why over 20% of all bitcoins haven't moved in over 5.5 years
And over 50% of all bitcoins haven't moved in over 1.5 years
bitinfocharts.com/top-100-dormant_1y-bitcoin-addresses.html
bitinfocharts.com/top-100-dormant_5y-bitcoin-addresses.html
newsbtc.com/2019/01/10/bitcoin-supply-lost-forever/

Also always the most value moved daily
bitinfocharts.com/comparison/sentinusd-btc.html

Also the most transactions and most active addresses daily
bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-transactions.html
bitinfocharts.com/comparison/sentbyaddress-btc.html

Also the most secure with the highest hash rate by far
bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-hashrate.html

Attached: 1559304895289.jpg (326x347, 20K)

lol you think a wallet address means anything?. i can generate a bsv paper wallet right not and accept bsv for all kinds of illegal shit. and i can sell the wallet itself or even the coins if i want.

you bsv tards are delusional.

It's the only fucking thing the technology offers. If you're into "crypto" but don't care about the decentralization aspect you couldn't be more retarded. It's the only aspect.
>more braindead cancer
Liberty Reserve was just a company running a database. Saying it's equivalent means you either have Downs syndrome or are lying.

Yes and the earth is flat and Zuckerberg is the king of the lizard people.

Well I haven't gone bankrupt yet, so I guess I'm doin alright.

just curious whats your definition of decentralized

I'll answer for him:
Something decentralised is censor resistant, and and by definition, there is no crypto truly decentralised nor can be. There is, tho, less and more secure. The more hashing power, the more secure.

>Smart OGs are still in BTC which is why over 20% of all bitcoins haven't moved in over 5.5 years

Most likely lost coins from early wallets

>lol you think a wallet address means anything?. i can generate a bsv paper wallet right not and accept bsv for all kinds of illegal shit. and i can sell the wallet itself or even the coins if i want.
>you bsv tards are delusional.

Everything you do on the blockchain is recorded forever permanently and can be eventually traced back to you and that evidence used in court, you'd have to be very stupid to use Bitcoin for illegal activity, keep doing it and live on borrowed time

o think hes talking about a quantim computer brute forcing private keys. theoretically if you have such a device you could generate trillions of random keys per second. at that point crypto itself may become obsolete or everything would have to switch to sha1024 or whatever the biggest sha is...

>If you're into "crypto" but don't care about the decentralization aspect you couldn't be more retarded. It's the only aspect.

Attached: icedragon_QORR7djd7p.png (1598x785, 180K)

good luck proving a wallet is mine. keep in mind im talking about paper wallets and not kyc exchange wallets.

paper wallets are not traceable unless your a retard.

>Most likely lost coins from early wallets
Many of those wallets still get deposits over the years, including this year. They just never withdraw
I do the same, I've been holding since 2015 and still buy with extra money when I get paid, but I've still never sold any

If satoshi wanted btc to be anonymous he would have made it so

It's mainly about decentralization of power. Get this in your head as quick as possible.

If you have 5 autistic developers who decide on protocol changes --> no decentralization, no matter how many nodes your networks has

If your protocol is fixed --> truely decentraliszed because nobody can alter it for their greedy self interest.

> BTC has extremely limited utility
are you somehow retarded?

> Post doubting me is radioactive color
It's all so tiresome.

fuck off retard, creg is NSA, cia are rothschild's private kid fucking police. creg is gonna btfo the cia. next talking point shill.

Attached: architectcraig9mm.jpg (840x348, 259K)

Resistant to central control and shutdown. By operating in multiple countries Liberty Reserve had a tiny bit of resistance to shutdown that was easily countered. In the case of BTC even if a miner controls more than 50% any attempt to misuse that power will be countered by the system. Even though most miners are now in China in practice a government can't just seize mining equipment and shut down BTC. Decentralization is the only reason crypto hasn't been shut down and the only added value the technology brings to the table.

According to all governments crypto was illegal fake money until some conceded with legislation because they knew they couldn't stop it.

he's said it other times in the best. the best thing about cryptography is "it breaks" every x years you lose a bit of security. in some time in the future lost coins will become mineable again.

by that logic satoshi didn't want it to scale either or he would have given us bigger blocks from the start. satoshi was just a man. he wasnt perfect and neither was his code. he was genious enough to create the blockchain but not smart enough to to forsee his tiny blocks wouldn't meet tx demand.

right. so basically it boils down to miners correct? now how does non mining nodes secure the network? they dont. its unironically all about the incentivization of miners. the more skin in the game the more they are incentizied. of course hash favors btc but only because the price is high. miners follow price

That's not relevant to anything I said. Allowing hidden transactions in the first iteration of an experimental protocol would have resulted in a protocol that nobody trusted. There are many use cases for completely public ledgers but also for hidden ones.

>Resistant to central control
literally name one coin that is resistant to central control

BTC:
artificially crippled 1mb block cap
7 tx/second maximum
Currently a $4.37 fee right now to have your tx in the next block

BSV:
128mb block cap, 2gb next month, unlimited in Feb 2020
896 tx/second / 14,000 tx/second maximum respectively
$0.001 fee right now to have your tx in the next block

If you don't understand that you deserve to lose your money

That leads me to another question, the hash war. Does anybody know how/when/why someone wins the hashwar? Are there essentially some type of rules to that shit that brainlets like me don't understand?

>According to all governments crypto was illegal fake money until some conceded with legislation because they knew they couldn't stop it.

absolute propagandic nonsense

Every single one is more resistant than previous examples like Liberty Reserve or e-gold which were both coincidentally shut down. BTC is the most resistant which is why it's most valued.

“It never really hits a scale ceiling”

-Satoshi Nakamoto aka Dr Craig Wright

But is BTC truly stuck having to stay at 1mb? Couldn't they just switch over to big blocks and btfo the forks?

satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/posts/bitcointalk/485/
Here satoshi explains how block size could be increased
Craig Wright :”private but not anonymous”
Sounds a lot like the way satoshi designed btc

BTC is unforkable
that is why segwit is a soft fork
BTC miners will never fork to something that diminishes their profits

hash wars seem like they would go on for as long as bitcoin is alive. its not some huge event like some make it out to be

Absolute documented and unquestionable fact. If there was anyone to charge they would have charged them with operating an unlicensed financial transaction company. There was talk of charging miners but anyone who looked into it saw it was impractical. You're the one spreading propaganda you found in some blog last week while I'm recounting documented history. I don't follow any of this retarded shitcoin drama except through this board.

>by that logic satoshi didn't want it to scale either or he would have given us bigger blocks from the start. satoshi was just a man. he wasnt perfect and neither was his code. he was genious enough to create the blockchain but not smart enough to to forsee his tiny blocks wouldn't meet tx demand.

There was no block size cap when Bitcoin was released.

Even a 6 year old can understand why Creg Sanjay is an incompetent lamer:

>the Turing machine is like a simplistic programming language
>Turing completeness means something can act like a Turing machine
>one of its features is infinite loops
>without infinite loops you can't craft powerful algorithms and solve complex problems
>CSW doesn't know this because he never programmed
>CSW thinks this is no biggie
>literally changes the meaning of the word to fit his sales pitch
>promises to kill dapps with impotent garbage
>promises to kill crypto with lies

Attached: lamer.jpg (791x791, 169K)

My database running on AWS:
No real upper limit on transactions per second. Only cost is hardware cost which is tiny because each transaction needs almost no effort.

Sell all your crypto and buy entries in my clearly superior database.

Blockstream will never do that, they are even talking about reducing the blocksize, even if they did BSV is way ahead of them - the BTC/BCH node software is single core CPU bound and can only handle 22mb/block, BSV can handle 1.423gb as shown on the testnet, BSV is one million miles ahead