⭐ Merited by gmaxwell (1)
in short he is not a bitcoin coder, not a bitcoiner, and not a bitcoin influencer.
no point talking more about him as he has nothing really relating him to bitcoin but scams. thus lets not give him more attention. let his name die out and let his faked fame evaporate
no point talking more about him as he has nothing really relating him to bitcoin but scams. thus lets not give him more attention. let his name die out and let his faked fame evaporate
He seems to have influenced you pretty strongly. You appear to use a number of his arguments when you talk about how you think Bitcoin should work. Let's look at some comparisons:
Quote from: Craig Wright on https://medium.com/@craig_10243/the-myth-of-the-full-validation-node-d7db52748649
The deception that has been allowed to creep into Bitcoin (or that pseudo-Bitcoin called BTC) is that non-mining nodes help in any way. They do not. The concept lowers your own personal security, and limits the usefulness of Bitcoin.
also those few people that have slow internet because they are home users actually bottleneck the propogation. and thus they are not helping the network. so just being a full node for the sake of thinking they are helping, is actually doing the opposite.
Quote from: Craig Wright on https://medium.com/@craig_10243/the-myth-of-the-full-validation-node-d7db52748649
Soft forks and all of the changes make something that is not Bitcoin. You are not validating Bitcoin, you are validating the fork of the week, when you allow soft forks and the UASF model.
look at cores tactics
1. go soft, avoid node decision of consensus vote
2. go soft to give only pools the vote
3. if pools say no, UASF bomb the pools.
4. if the community say no to UASF then do a mandatory activation with a trigger for late 2018 no matter how many pools or nodes vote or veto
1. go soft, avoid node decision of consensus vote
2. go soft to give only pools the vote
3. if pools say no, UASF bomb the pools.
4. if the community say no to UASF then do a mandatory activation with a trigger for late 2018 no matter how many pools or nodes vote or veto
Quote from: Craig Wright on https://medium.com/@craig_10243/the-myth-of-the-full-validation-node-d7db52748649
All of the real changes to BTC have been about subverting the key controls in Bitcoin. They have all been about making Bitcoin something that cannot scale, that cannot function.
Quote from: franky1 July 05, 2018, 08:30:48 PM https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4605285.msg41591255#msg41591255
BUT the usefulness and function of btc has stalled.
LN is not a BTC saviour. dont scream it can never die. instead scream it can comatose and then dmand th devs actually do something to prevent it stagnating.
again LN is not the saviour.. devs are already planning o letting other coins use LN while keping btc stalled in a effort that people lock up their BTC move it into LN and then not want to ever sttle back to btc due to all th things the devs have done to stall btc onchain innovation
to all those that think just screaming btc is utopia and gonna take over the world. should look back to 2011-2013 where the same was said.. and then the devs started to show their weakness by calling it a beta experiment and btc cant scale.
LN is not a BTC saviour. dont scream it can never die. instead scream it can comatose and then dmand th devs actually do something to prevent it stagnating.
again LN is not the saviour.. devs are already planning o letting other coins use LN while keping btc stalled in a effort that people lock up their BTC move it into LN and then not want to ever sttle back to btc due to all th things the devs have done to stall btc onchain innovation
to all those that think just screaming btc is utopia and gonna take over the world. should look back to 2011-2013 where the same was said.. and then the devs started to show their weakness by calling it a beta experiment and btc cant scale.
Looks like you two have got a great deal in common. Like two
