Quote from: franky1 on May 07, 2018, 12:25:04 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on May 07, 2018, 05:34:34 AM

Quote

just look at the mirror
adam back | craig wright (both scamming to say they invented "bitcoin")

Adam Back never claimed that he was Satoshi Nakamoto. Craig Wright did. That makes Craig Wright a scammer.

i agree CW is a scammer.
but adam back was saying he was part of bitcoins creation too.. yet he wrote no code in 2008-2009 to have created it.

But Adam never said he is Satoshi Nakamoto. What I know he did is wanting to get some credit for inventing where Bitcoin's Proof of Work is based on. Hashcash.

Adam Back made Hashcash and he wants to get credit for making Bitcoin possible. I know it might be reaching for some people but give some credit where credit is due.

We cannot say the same for the scammer Craig "Faketoshi" Wright.

Quote

Quote from: Wind_FURY on May 07, 2018, 05:34:34 AM

Quote

gmaxwell | Jgarzic (both saying they made the main nodes of the network)

Gregory Maxwell did not try to work with Jihan Wu, Barry Silbert and the NYA to hard fork to S2X. The "scaling debate" was a red herring. It was a political move to take over development and save Bitmain's covert AsicBoost capabilities in their miners.

so Gmax didnt try getting the network to bilateral split? is that what your saying
so gmax didnt employ samson mow to UASF

oh and by the way.. ver and Wu didnt cause the bilateral split.. but hey i understand your too indocrinated by all the reddit propaganda
again BLOQ and BLOCKSTREAM (core team) instigated the bilateral split.
here is gmax literally begging the core opposition to bilateral split, but the opposition wanted a proper consensus. which greg hated as it lwould have left core stuck at 35% if the bilateral split did not occur.. hense why he insisted the only option was BLOQ as a silent partnr to force a bilateral split

The "split" you are saying is not a split. It was a move to pressure the miners to activate Segwit. There was no "split". Bitcoin post-Segwit is still compatible pre-Segwit.

It was Bitcoin Cash that did a hard fork from the main chain because it changed the consesus rules.

Quote from: gmaxwell on October 18, 2016, 08:21:30 AM

What you are describing is what I and others call a bilaterial hardfork-- where both sides reject the other.

I tried to convince the authors of BIP101 to make their proposal bilateral by requiring the sign bit be set in the version in their blocks (existing nodes require it to be unset). Sadly, the proposals authors were aggressively against this.

Why don't we ask him on what he really meant by that. No offense but we in Bitcoin have a saying, "don't trust, verify". Wink

Quote

Quote from: Wind_FURY on May 07, 2018, 05:34:34 AM

Quote

theymos | ver (both saying they own and moderate the main information portals)

But Roger Ver's portal is confusing the public that BCH = BTC.

actually roger ver is not claiming bch is btc
roger is claiming cash is "bitcoin"
what you said is like saying RV claims AUD is USD (makes no rational sense)

No what I am saying is when Roger Ver says "Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin", hilarity follows. Accept it, when people say Bitcoin they mean the real Bitcoin, not BCH. Bitcoin Cash is the altcoin.

Quote

theymos is claiming core is the only "bitcoin".. check out bitcoin.org.
again the hypocrisy of arguing about team B applies to team A

Maybe you should first look at the bitcoin.com website. Do you agree with how Roger Ver is fraudulently trying to confuse the users, especially new users?

Do you support it?

Quote

but hey. instead of talking about "bitcoin" decentralisation you seem to only want to defend core team members

Yes Bitcoin's decentralization, look at the different software implementations, https://coin.dance/nodes

Anyone can make their own implementation.

Quote

you need to learn both teams are paid by barry silbert. and it is just kardashian drama to get people to argue about if they love Kylie or khloe. pretending its all a fight of 2 surnames and which surname desrves the kardashian brand. all so that they can claim ownership and prevent the other 7billion people from using the brand because they want the name trademarked into the family...
dont you get it no one should own the name.. not team a or b.. but those funding both teams want the sheep fighting about both teams they own to make the community choose one team as the centralist. and thus the funders win either way.

Please stop with this. If this is only "drama" then why do you support Bitcoin Cash? I know I like the Core developers because I believe they are the best developers in blockchain, and I also believe that the best should be the stewards of the network.

Quote

BIG PICTURE THINKING REQUIRED. not core defense small minds
no one should own "bitcoin"

Roger has been calling his altcoin "Bitcoin Cash" and saying it is the real "Bitcoin", but do not look at me if the community disagrees and laughs at him.

When people say Bitcoin they mean the real Bitcoin, the cryptocurrency you call "Bitcoin Core".

Quote

not ver.. not theymos
no one one team should say they are the only node software for the networks not bloq not core
no one scammer manager should pretend they were involved at day one making bitcoin. not C.wright not A.back

https://coin.dance/nodes

Run a node you want. Plus Adam Back never said he was Satoshi Nakamoto.

Adam made Hashcash, his name is and Hascash were given credit and cited in the Bitcoin whitepaper.

Quote

but hey.. seems youll defend core till its fiat2.0 and just let it centralise until its time for you to run back to fiat1.0 with your profits. as thats what most core fanboys only care about. making fiat profits. not caring one bit about bitcoins decentralisation

It is decentralized you can run your own software impelentation if you want, https://coin.dance/nodes