Re: [ANN] [BSV] [Bitcoin SV] Satoshi Vision - Unmoderated Thread
⭐ Merited by JayJuanGee (1)
Here are a couple of my comments that were deleted from the old thread (I refuse to waste my time commenting in the new thread).
This one points out how BSV's transaction volume is being steadily manipulated in order to surpass BTC's transactions per day.
The one dispels the myth that BTC is "ignoring the miners":
So does this one:
This one is about how the count of active addresses is a better metric for determining the popularity of a coin than transaction volume:
Finally, this is why I stopped commenting in their thread (in addition to having all of my comments deleted, lol):
In any case, this thread is a good initiative, and we should encourage people who had their replies deleted to repost them here, as well as keep this thread listed above the actual ANN thread at all times.
This one points out how BSV's transaction volume is being steadily manipulated in order to surpass BTC's transactions per day.
Quote from: Bitcoin Forum
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.
You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.
Thanks for posting this. This plot is one of my favorites to demonstrate the manipulation of statistics by BSV. Notice how all the lines are pretty wavy, indicating a rather tremendous amount of variation in the number of transactions? Then notice how the line smooths out for BSV between late May and mid July? This is because BSV was coordinating a ramp up in transactions to surpass BCH. It lost all variance because all (most) transactions are being performed by a single entity.
Here's what it looks like close-up so you can see it in better detail:
Let me guess: you are going to say this methodical, calculated ramp up in transactions is completely organic, right? The loss of variance is also organic, correct? Then why did the variance reappear after the ramp up had ended?
You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.
Quote
Thanks for posting this. This plot is one of my favorites to demonstrate the manipulation of statistics by BSV. Notice how all the lines are pretty wavy, indicating a rather tremendous amount of variation in the number of transactions? Then notice how the line smooths out for BSV between late May and mid July? This is because BSV was coordinating a ramp up in transactions to surpass BCH. It lost all variance because all (most) transactions are being performed by a single entity.
Here's what it looks like close-up so you can see it in better detail:
Let me guess: you are going to say this methodical, calculated ramp up in transactions is completely organic, right? The loss of variance is also organic, correct? Then why did the variance reappear after the ramp up had ended?
The one dispels the myth that BTC is "ignoring the miners":
Quote from: Bitcoin Forum
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic...
Funny how you have to invent competitions in order to have one where you are actually winning.
This statement highlights the cognitive dissonance of BSVers. How can transaction fees be so high if BTC is ignoring miners? Either transaction fees are high, or miners are being ignored. Both items cannot be present at the same time.
Average BSV block reward per day minus fees: $148,950
Average BSV transaction fees per day: $125
The only way this could possibly happen (before the next halving) is if transaction fees increase by a factor of 1191 while the price remains the same. This will never happen.
Let's compare the same stats for BTC:
Average BTC block reward per day minus fees: $14,400,000
Average BTC transaction fees per day: $136,444
The ratio between block reward and fees for BTC is only 105.5, whereas it is 1191 for BSV! Your entire existence has just been rendered absurd.
Additionally your last stress test could only produce a block that was 8 MB. Why not just use Bcash? What's the difference? At least the Bcash cult leader doesn't think he's Satoshi.
What a joke.
Quote
Funny how you have to invent competitions in order to have one where you are actually winning.
BTC can build a layer that ignores the miners, if BTC ever reaches 20k again it will cost 50$ just to fund a lightning node with an on chain transaction.
This statement highlights the cognitive dissonance of BSVers. How can transaction fees be so high if BTC is ignoring miners? Either transaction fees are high, or miners are being ignored. Both items cannot be present at the same time.
At this rate BSV miners will claim a higher reward from transaction fees over block rewards, this is how bitcoin was meant to be.
Average BSV block reward per day minus fees: $148,950
Average BSV transaction fees per day: $125
The only way this could possibly happen (before the next halving) is if transaction fees increase by a factor of 1191 while the price remains the same. This will never happen.
Let's compare the same stats for BTC:
Average BTC block reward per day minus fees: $14,400,000
Average BTC transaction fees per day: $136,444
The ratio between block reward and fees for BTC is only 105.5, whereas it is 1191 for BSV! Your entire existence has just been rendered absurd.
Additionally your last stress test could only produce a block that was 8 MB. Why not just use Bcash? What's the difference? At least the Bcash cult leader doesn't think he's Satoshi.
What a joke.
So does this one:
Quote from: Bitcoin Forum
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic...
False. You literally just said this:
Where do you think that $50 is going? Besides, how can fees be so high if everybody is ignoring the miners?
Bitcoin miners are doing just fine. You're just rehashing that same tired, disproven narrative perpetuated by other BSV idiots that we've heard a thousand times before.
Ohhhh what about the poor, poor miners? Who will think of them???
Everything is driven by economic incentives. LN will be used because blocks are already quite full, which means the miners are already making maximum income from transaction fees. There's no problem here whatsoever.
Quote
The lightning network (the only Scaling solution BTC has come up with) literally ignores miners in every way possible.
False. You literally just said this:
if BTC ever reaches 20k again it will cost 50$ just to fund a lightning node with an on chain transaction.
Where do you think that $50 is going? Besides, how can fees be so high if everybody is ignoring the miners?
Bitcoin miners are doing just fine. You're just rehashing that same tired, disproven narrative perpetuated by other BSV idiots that we've heard a thousand times before.
Ohhhh what about the poor, poor miners? Who will think of them???
Everything is driven by economic incentives. LN will be used because blocks are already quite full, which means the miners are already making maximum income from transaction fees. There's no problem here whatsoever.
This one is about how the count of active addresses is a better metric for determining the popularity of a coin than transaction volume:
Quote from: Bitcoin Forum
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic...
The only reason your comments get deleted is when you post twice in a row or if you spam off-topic nonsense. In this case you only posted once, and while your comment is indeed nonsense it is still not off-topic, so it won't be deleted.
BSV muppets always fail to take into account active addresses, which is a much better metric for estimating the popularity of a coin.
Active addresses
BTC: 537k
ETH: 313k
DASH: 64.6k
LTC: 42.8k
DOGE: 34.45k
BSV: 28.4k
ETC: 18.3k
BCH: 17.2k
https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/activeaddresses-bsv.html
Congrats, more people use DOGE on a daily basis than BSV, despite it only having 14.5% the total market cap of your tremendously overpriced coin.
The "payment" aspect for BSV accounts for 2.1% of all usage... just like Satoshi intended...
Quote
https://sv.coin.dance/blocks
Proof is here. bitcoin SV now averaging bigger blocks the BTC on a daily basis. This explains the recent price surge for BSV. If Bitcoin SV continues increasing block sizes at this growth rate, it will be a very slow death for BTC. BSV price will continue to increase simply because there will be an incentive for miners to mine the most profitable chain.
This comment will be flagged and deleted by dictator moderators on this form.
Proof is here. bitcoin SV now averaging bigger blocks the BTC on a daily basis. This explains the recent price surge for BSV. If Bitcoin SV continues increasing block sizes at this growth rate, it will be a very slow death for BTC. BSV price will continue to increase simply because there will be an incentive for miners to mine the most profitable chain.
This comment will be flagged and deleted by dictator moderators on this form.
The only reason your comments get deleted is when you post twice in a row or if you spam off-topic nonsense. In this case you only posted once, and while your comment is indeed nonsense it is still not off-topic, so it won't be deleted.
BSV muppets always fail to take into account active addresses, which is a much better metric for estimating the popularity of a coin.
Active addresses
BTC: 537k
ETH: 313k
DASH: 64.6k
LTC: 42.8k
DOGE: 34.45k
BSV: 28.4k
ETC: 18.3k
BCH: 17.2k
https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/activeaddresses-bsv.html
Congrats, more people use DOGE on a daily basis than BSV, despite it only having 14.5% the total market cap of your tremendously overpriced coin.
The "payment" aspect for BSV accounts for 2.1% of all usage... just like Satoshi intended...
Finally, this is why I stopped commenting in their thread (in addition to having all of my comments deleted, lol):
Quote from: Bitcoin Forum
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic...
There are 2 sets of multi-accounters working this thread, if not just 1. One of the main problems with this thread is that it was started by a banned user named korner. He's opened probably 100 different accounts to troll the forum, one of which is my impostor.
Frankly I don't give a shit about SV anymore. Its a comedic spectacle. No longer worth bumping this thread over.
Quote
There is a lot that (the real) nutildah says with which I do not agree.
However, this nutlidah impostor should rethink their approach. It seems evident that the username was chosen to intentionally deceive. Very poor taste. I doubt you're fooling anyone. You're only making yourself look bad.
However, this nutlidah impostor should rethink their approach. It seems evident that the username was chosen to intentionally deceive. Very poor taste. I doubt you're fooling anyone. You're only making yourself look bad.
There are 2 sets of multi-accounters working this thread, if not just 1. One of the main problems with this thread is that it was started by a banned user named korner. He's opened probably 100 different accounts to troll the forum, one of which is my impostor.
Frankly I don't give a shit about SV anymore. Its a comedic spectacle. No longer worth bumping this thread over.
In any case, this thread is a good initiative, and we should encourage people who had their replies deleted to repost them here, as well as keep this thread listed above the actual ANN thread at all times.