No thinblock BIP = no thinblocks. You are welcome to go deep diving into the esoteric specifics of why thinblocks aren't the best solution, but don't spread lies about how 'they were rejected because bandwidth doesn't matter.'
You offer no evidence supporting the assertion that Bitcoin's usefulness is "already declining." The market says you are wrong about that.
Your personal anecdotes about banksters are not relevant. VC/fintech investment in BTC is exploding; Hearn's R3 consortium is going hard.
And here's the thing that really makes you look clueless: USAA is now offering Coinbase integration on all customer accounts.
As for my signature, it's not *me* telling people what Bitcoin is/isn't but rather three noted experts stating the facts. Sorry if that hurts your butt because you think you understand Bitcoin better than Hal Finney.
What's wrong with you?
Because there is no BIP we can't talk about it? (there was a BUIP, btw)
Saying investments are "exploding" is a strange way to say they are drying out (that's a fact. Most investments go to some other coins currently or to "blockchain" / "sidechain" techs)
USAA just completes an integration to a watch-only wallet they startet nearly a year ago. Is that what you were waiting for?
And about your signature: you take the quotes that fit your opinion. Do you really think I'm so stupid to don't know that it's possible to lie / manipulate with quotes? Please, show some respect. I'm not stupid.
And Hal Finney - do you think you understand Bitcoin better than Satoshi?
Once again, you are welcome to discuss xthin blocks all you like, just please don't spread the false idea they are not being implemented in Core 'because bandwidth doesn't matter.' LMK when there is a BIP, and we can go from there.
Where is the lie in my quotes? They all seem like solid facts to me. Sorry they don't support your ideas for CoinbaseCoin.
Try focusing on the quotes that are actually in my sig, not the general class of all quotes ever (including dishonest, selective ones).