Quote from: Biodom on September 07, 2019, 04:46:31 PM

Quote from: jbreher on September 07, 2019, 04:39:22 PM

Quote from: Krubster on September 07, 2019, 02:06:57 PM

Quote from: hv_ on September 07, 2019, 01:46:59 PM

There's a lot of evidence that Segwit is the alteration. Read the docs, the white paper

The same evidence that CSW is satoshi?

WTF are you on about? How could evidence of personal identity have anything whatsoever to do with evidence of protocol change?

Quote

I'm not sure if you're trolling or trying to be serious.

Back at ya.

See any evidence of SegWit in the white paper? No?

Explicitly in front of your face. Willful dereliction of truthiness.

SegWit was indeed an alteration of the Bitcoin protocol. Undeniably. There is really no way to argue otherwise.

...and why that protocol could not be changed?

Quote from: hv_ on September 07, 2019, 01:46:59 PM

There's a lot of evidence that Segwit is the alteration. Read the docs, the white paper

Quote from: hv_ on September 07, 2019, 01:46:59 PM

There's a lot of evidence that Segwit is the alteration. Read the docs, the white paper

Quote from: hv_ on September 07, 2019, 01:46:59 PM

There's a lot of evidence that Segwit is the alteration. Read the docs, the white paper

Quote from: hv_ on September 07, 2019, 01:46:59 PM

There's a lot of evidence that Segwit is the alteration. Read the docs, the white paper

I did not say the protocol could not be changed. I am pointing out Krubster's rather daft implication that the Satoshi-CSW question has anything whatsoever to do with the fact that SegWit is the alteration.