...
So my comments are specifically supported by your own statements. Do you care to retract your statement now and be more honest with the community?
How have I contradicted myself? The purpose of the device is to increase bitcoin security. Gavincoin is not bitcoin.
In order for the device to support the fork, it would have to cost several times more. As it stands, the thing will probably cost somewhere between 20 and 100 dollars (not including the cost of electricity and bandwidth), and it will take weeks if not months to sync with the network.
For years The Bitcoin Foundation has focused on solutions and frameworks which would destroy the P2P nature of Bitcoin's basic support model with a steady chorus of people crowing about how the great Lord Satoshi always wanted the support infrastructure to eventually be relegated to specialists. That was not the outward public PR which still leveraged 'peer-2-peer' line heavily, but any internal questions went directly to that line of argument.
Now all of a sudden the BF seems to have belatedly found religion and are subsidizing nodes after seeing what the MP folk are up to. Hilarious. I would put the odds at right around zero that these subsidies last more than one day past when the exponential growth patch is ensconced.
Satoshi was either jacking everyone off with his projections of a centralized system in which case it was a clever use of resources, or he meant what he's (supposedly) said in which case he's was kind of ignorant. One way or another I cannot help but look forward to actually showing people why decentralization is associated with robustness rather than trying to explain it to a bunch of semi-tards. Especially if MP and co are doing the heavy lifting.