You seem driven by illogical emotion. How can anything Craig says to nocoiners have any destabilizing effect whatsoever upon the (presumably Bitcoin) market? By definition, nocoiners have no effect upon the Bitcoin market whatsoever.

---

Another illogical emotional outburst?

---

Funny interpretation. So satoshi provides a description of a smart contract as a simple example of the types of things that can be done on Bitcoin, and you take that as proof that satoshi is stating he has never built smart contracts?

And WTF does hearsay about what you claim Szabo said have to do with anything germane?

---

OTOH, the _technology_ which BSV embodies is much closer to what satoshi bequeathed unto us as compared to the technology which BTC embodies. As such, it is BTC which is arguably the 'rival technology'.

---

For this to be true, it would require facts not yet entered into evidence. Sure, you have a mountain of circumstantial evidence, but from a logical standpoint, not conclusive.

---

Other than, you know, the fact that it is humming right along, totally unaffected by your FUDspread.

---

Fascinating. Clicking that link finds the following:


What could this mean? Is the Wayback Machine not a bulletproof historical record after all?

Yes, such a claim, should your characterization be accurate, is absurd on its face. I'm a bit weirded out by how Wayback is treating it, however.

---

Your set of possibilities omits a third possibility. And that would be that "faketoshi" actually did verify a signature for you. You evidently believe this to be "unrealistic". However, the very framing of the question in this manner precludes the scant -- though actually real -- possibility.

You wield your supposed razor as would a religious zealot.

---

I fail to see how Gilder's being convinced that Gavin is convinced says anything about the morality of Gavin's claim.

---

Haha. No truer words have been spoken. Yet I wonder how aware of self is the speaker?


Well, no questions other than whether or not such was "abuse", or if indeed such were "attacks". These are things that are subjective, and only meaningful from a given perspective.

---

Perhaps you are forgetting Back's public claim that hashcash was "pretty much Bitcoin minus the deflationary aspect". Note that this is not an actual quote, and may be somewhat inaccurate, but the claim was indeed that he invented hashcash, which was pretty much Bitcoin minus one aspect.

edit: found it:



Not that this has anything to do with Anastasia, but we might as well try to keep things accurate here.

::sigh:: yes, it is your right to delete any and all content that you wish. For any reason whatsoever. Well, at least you have the vaguest shreds of decency left to leave a link that others may follow.

However, you do not have the right to characterize my posts as "filled with lies". Well, unless you care to identify the (so-stated) "lies" therein, and rebut them.

Well, you can -- as in, you have the ability to -- in your own self-moderated thread, but that is a chickenshit action, not a rightful one.

The attentive reader will note that a challenge has been issued to nullius to rebut any "lies" he claims that I have posted. Shall s/he rise to the occasion?