How could evidence of personal identity have anything whatsoever to do with evidence of protocol change?
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.
I am pretty confident the white paper doesnt say anything about Turing completeness, legally enforceable smart contracts, token protocols, large data storage capability and all the other shit in Bitcoin SV marketing
Yet interestingly, all fully supported in the 0.1 version of the Bitcoin protocol. You know, before the Cripple Rangers took control of the codebase. SegWit, on the other hand...
Funny, eh?So what's the point you are trying to make?
Hey jbreher how would you spin EDA and bcash and BSv's current difficulty adjustment algos? what version did that come in?
Well, there's really no way to spin that. That's a change indeed.
Of course, SV is the project where the majority of vocal participants are stating a desire to return to the 0.1 protocol. So if this will come to pass, that will be rolled back. Of course there is no guarantee of future developments.
Meantime, that is a legitimate claim to a protocol change.
Wait so Bitcoin = bad because Segwit is "indeed an alteration of the Bitcoin protocol"
but bcash Bsv = good because their shitty changes are "legitimate claim to a protocol change"
That is indeed pretty f'ing funny. If not for your constant desperate shilling of shitcoins, you almost passed as an intelligent person, a shame really.