I keep seeing trolls posting how Bitcoin-Legacy is better because they have so many more github commits
compared to Bitcoin-Cash, claiming that the development is so much more advanced with the Bitcoin Core "Dream Team" as Trace Mayer calls them
. However they seem to fail to understand the technical debt
segwit and other additions from Core adds to the system. Its like politicians who write laws in order to to fix the unintended consequences from other laws they made before. Should we also consider the regulatory bureaucracy a success if politicians pass many laws? I don't think so.
When examining Bitcoin Legacy, I just don't see much development going on anymore. Everyone is scrambling to get Lightning Network working, and show proof of concepts and things. But it seems until they solve the routing, liquidity, user interface, and other problems
, its kind of like a technical bottleneck. There is also a danger that this is going to lead to centralized hubs for LN
, which could result in KYC/AML requirements and permission for hubs
. This makes it not even very exciting if LN does become successful and used. In fact, it even was a false narrative
that segwit was needed for LN, and we even have payment channels built on BCH already as well
. Not to mention with a strangled blocksize like on Bitcoin-Legacy, LN acts as the strangler fig
, and allows a vector for complete usurpation of Satoshi's original model by the legacy banking oligarchs. Core brags about Schnorr signatures, but some are even saying Schnorr could come to BCH even before BTC-Legacy
Then on the other hand I see Bitcoin-Cash has cleared the technical bottleneck by increasing blocksize. I see a flurry of activity on the development side, not necessarily even on the protocol, but on top of it. We have things like blockpress.com, memo.cash, and things like the chainbet protocol
. We have tip bots like tippr, and even on-chain tipbots like chaintip.org. People are coming out with all of these new token proposals
, and colored coins
, and cashshuffle
, and other things. Businesses like satoshidice are being revived. People are making cool games like blockchain.poker, and dozer.cash. These things are no longer possible or feasible on Bitcoin-Core with the giant fees
and unreliable transactions
, but on Bitcoin-Cash we are able to build again. The market seems to be moving on.
Trolls will point to market cap and say that we in the Bitcoin Cash community are losing, but when examining other metrics we are actually succeeding and winning many battles. We are attracting builders and innovators back to Bitcoin. It really seems like the market is in a bit of delusion phase right now. If you look at coinmarketcap
, all of the top blockchains are not even really currencies anymore
. They are utility tokens, and crypto assets
and things like that. There are dozens of these obscure blockchains with billion dollar market caps and its kind of bizarre, they are not being used for much utility in the real world. I think its just a symptom of the blocked progress on Bitcoin the #1 Blockchain ledger, but now Bitcoin Cash is the common sense continuation of that ledger
and we are finally seeing advancement again.
*Open Bazaar was crossed-out after their S2X support retraction, see edit at bottom. These guys submitted by
have deep pockets, but as you will see below, they are funded by even deeper pockets.
We can't leave this to chance or "the markets to decide" when there is such a malicious intent to manipulate the markets by those powerful players. So that's why all the people saying: "Don't worry, S2X won't happen" or "S2X is DOA" need to stop, we are at a 'make-or-break' moment for Bitcoin. It's very dumb to underestimate them. If you don't know yet who those malicious players are, read below:
We need to keep exposing them everywhere. Using Garzik as a pawn now, after they failed when they bought Hearn and Andresen (Here are the corrupted former 'good guys'), they are using the old and effective 'Problem-Reaction-Solution' combined with the 'Divide & Conquer' strategies to try to hijack Bitcoin. Well, effective before the current social media era, in which hidden motives can be brought to the light of day to be exposed.
Public pressure works when your profits depend on your reputation. The social media criticism worked for companies like Open Bazaar, which after weeks of calling them out on their S2X support, they finally withdrew it
Please contact the companies on these lists if you have any type of relationship with them, we have just a few days left until the fork:
Regarding OpenBazaar: * openbazaar (OB1) developer appears to be spreading pro s2x fud. someone needs to fork their project * PSA : Open Bazaars latest investment round was for 200K from Barry Silberts DCG (Digital Currency Group)
(See edit at the bottom)
B2X (S2X/NYA) is nothing more than an open attack on Bitcoin, not an "upgrade" as they want to sell it. This attack has no 'consensus', at all. It was "agreed" by a bunch of miners and corporations behind closed doors, with no community nor developers support. Only miners and a few millionaires that stand to profit from the B2X attack support it. The vast majority of the Bitcoin community is totally against this attack on Bitcoin. Most of those companies are under DCG group:
Every bitcoiner should know about what DCG (Digital Currency Group) is, and call out publicly these crooks and the people they bribed that are working for the Corporations/Bankers against Bitcoin:
Brian Armstrong, Winklevoss brothers, Bobby Lee, Peter Smith, Nic Cary, Haipo Yang, Rick Falkvinge, Jon Matonis, Wences Casares, Tony Gallippi, Mike Belshe, Ryan X Charles,
Brian Hoffman/Sam Patterson/Chris Pacia (and all OB1 team)(see edit at the bottom), Gavin Andresen, Jeff Garzik, Mike Hearn, Roger Ver, Jihan Wu, John Mcaffe, Craig Wright, Barry Silbert, Larry Summers, Blythe Masters, Stephen Pair, Erik Voorhees, Vinny Lingham, Olivier Janssens, Jeremy Allaire, Peter Vessenes, Bruce Wagner, Brock Pierce, Aaron Voisine/Adam Traidman/Aaron Lasher (Breadwallet team), Glenn Hutchins (Federal Reserve Board of Directors), Bill Barhydt and Jiang Zhuoer.
Once people are informed, they won't be fooled (like all the poor guys at btc) and will follow Bitcoin instead of the S2X or Bcash or any other centralized altcoin they come up with disguised as Bitcoin.
DCG (Digital Currency Group) is the company spearheading the Segwit2x movement. The CEO of DCG is Barry Silbert, a former investment banker, and Mastercard is an investor in DCG.
Let's have a look at the people that control DCG: http://dcg.co/who-we-are/
Three board members are listed, and one Board "Advisor." Three of the four Members/advisors are particularly interesting: Glenn Hutchins
: Former Advisor to President Clinton. Hutchins sits on the board of The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, where he was reelected as a Class B director for a three-year term ending December 31, 2018. Yes, you read that correctly, currently sitting board member of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Barry Silbert
: CEO of DCG (Digital Currency Group, funded by Mastercard) who is also an Ex investment Banker at (Houlihan Lokey)
And then there's the "Board Advisor," Lawrence H. Summers:
"Chief Economist at the World Bank from 1991 to 1993. In 1993, Summers was appointed Undersecretary for International Affairs of the United States Department of the Treasury under the Clinton Administration. In 1995, he was promoted to Deputy Secretary of the Treasury under his long-time political mentor Robert Rubin. In 1999, he succeeded Rubin as Secretary of the Treasury. While working for the Clinton administration Summers played a leading role in the American response to the 1994 economic crisis in Mexico, the 1997 Asian financial crisis, and the Russian financial crisis. He was also influential in the American advised privatization of the economies of the post-Soviet states, and in the deregulation of the U.S financial system, including the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Summers Blythe Masters:
Former executive at JPMorgan Chase. She is currently the CEO of Digital Asset Holdings, a financial technology firm developing distributed ledger technology for wholesale financial services. Masters is widely credited as the creator of the credit default swap as a financial instrument. She is also Chairman of the Governing Board of the Linux Foundation’s open source Hyperledger Project, member of the International Advisory Board of Santander Group, and Advisory Board Member of the US Chamber of Digital Commerce. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blythe_Masters
Seriously....The segwit2x deal is being pushed through by a Company funded by Mastercard, Whose CEO Barry Silbert is ex investment banker, and the Board Members of DCG include a currently sitting member of the Board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and the Ex chief Economist for the World Bank and a guy responsible for the removal of Glass Steagall. It's fair to call these guys "bankers" right?
So that's the Board of DCG. They're spearheading the Segwit2x movement. As far as who is responsible for development, my research led me to "Bitgo". I checked the "Money Map" https://i.redd.it/15auzwkq3hiz.png
And sure enough, DCG is an investor in Bitgo.
(BTW, make sure you take a good look take a look at the money map and bookmark it for reference later, ^ it is really helpful.)
"Currently, development is being overseen by bitcoin security startup BitGo, with help from other developers including Bloq co-founder Jeff Garzik." https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoins-segwit2x-scaling-proposal-miners-offer-optimistic-outlook/
So Bitgo is overseeing development of Segwit2x with Jeff Garzick. Bitgo has a product/service that basically facilitates transactions and supposedly prevents double spending. It seems like their main selling point is that they insert themselves as middlemen to ensure Double spending doesn't happen, and if it does, they take the hit, of course for a fee, so it sounds sort of like the buyer protection paypal gives you: "Using the above multi-signature security model, BitGo can guarantee that transactions cannot be double spent. When BitGo co-signs a BitGo Instant transaction, BitGo takes on a financial obligation and issues a cryptographically signed guarantee on the transaction. The recipient of a BitGo Instant transaction can rest assured that in any event where the transaction is not ultimately confirmed in the blockchain, and loses money as a result, they can file a claim and will be compensated in full by BitGo."
So basically, they insert themselves as middlemen, guarantee your transaction gets confirmed and take a fee. What do we need this for though when we have a working blockchain that confirms payments in the next block already?
0-conf is safe when blocks aren't full and one confirmation should really be good enough for almost anyone on the most POW chain. So if we have a fully functional blockchain, there isn't much of a need for this service is there? They're selling protection against "The transaction not being confirmed in the Blockchain" but why wouldn't the transaction be getting confirmed in the blockchain? Every transaction should be getting confirmed, that's how Bitcoin works. So in what situation does "protection against the transaction not being confirmed in the blockchain" have value?
Is it possible that the Central Bankers that control development of Segwit2x plan to restrict block size to benefit their business model just like our good friends over at Blockstream attempted to do, although unsuccessfully as they were not able to deliver a working L2 in time?
It looks like Blockstream was an attempted corporate takeover to restrict block size and push people onto their L2, essentially stealing business away from miners. They seem to have failed, but now it almost seems like the Segwit2x might be a culmination of a very similar problem.
Also worth noting these two things, pointed out by Adrian-x
So segwit2x takes power away from core, but then gives it to guess who...Mastercard and central bankers.
- MasterCard made this statement before investing in DCG and Blockstream. (Very evident at 2:50 - enemy of digital cash watch the whole thing.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tu2mofrhw58
- Blockstream is part of the DCG portfolio and the day after the the NYA Barry personal thanked Adam Back for his assistant in putting the agreement together. https://twitter.com/barrysilbert/status/867706595102388224
So, to recap:
Did we just spend so much time fighting and bickering with core that we totally missed the REAL takeover of Bitcoin, happening right before our eyes, by the likes of currently serving Federal Reserve Bank of New York Board Members?
- DCG's Board of Directors and Advisors is almost entirely made up of Central Bankers including one currently sitting Member of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and another who was Chief Economist at the World Bank.
- The CEO of the company spearheading the Segwit2x movement (Barry Silbert) is an ex investment banker at Houlihan Lokey. Also, Mastercard is an investor in the company DCG, which Barry Silbert is the CEO of.
- The company overseeing development on Segwit2x, Bitgo, has a product/service that seems to only have utility if transacting on chain and using 0-Conf is inefficient or unreliable.
- Segwit2x takes power over Bitcoin development from core, but then literally gives it to central bankers and Mastercard. If segwit2x goes through, BTC development will quite literally be controlled by central bankers and a currently serving member of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
And before you dismiss all those hard and documented facts as just a 'conspiracy theory', think about this:
Of course, who thought that the ones holding the centralized financial power today (famous for back-door shady plots to consolidate even more power and control), would sit on their hands and let Bitcoin just stroll in and easily take that power away from them?
So, it is not a crazy conspiracy theory, but more like the logical and expected thing to happen. Don't let it happen.
Edit 2: Brian Armstrong taken out of the 'bad guys' list.
Edit 3: Welp, Brian Armstrong back on the blacklist for this flip-flop
. And added Winklevoss Brothers for this
, and Bobby Lee for this
Edit 4: Due to Brian Hoffman just issuing this excellent and explicit S2X/NYA support retraction
, I created this post to apologize for my previous posts (calling them out for the S2X support) and I will be editing my posts to reflect this positive change. I'm gladly back to being a supporter of the great and promising project that OpenBazaar has proven to be.
Edit 5: Added Blythe Masters (How could we leave her out?).
Edit 6: Added links to lists of companies supporting S2X/NYA.
excerpts from: Rick Falkvinge's post BS: submitted by
"We’re developing Lightning as a Layer-2 solution! It will require some really cool additional features!" Com:
"Ok, sounds good, but we need to scale on-chain soon too." BS:
"We’ve come up with this Segwit package to enable the Lightning Network. It’s kind of a hack, but it solves malleability and quadratic hashing. It has a small scaling bonus as well, but it’s not really intended as a scaling solution, so we don’t like it being talked of as such." Com:
"Sure, let’s do that and also increase the blocksize limit." BS:
"We hear that you want to increase the block size." Com:
"Yes. A 20MB limit would be appropriate at this time." BS:
"We propose 2MB, for a later increase to 4 and 8." Com:
"That’s ridiculous, but alright, as long as we’re scaling exponentially." BS:
"Actually, we changed our mind. We’re not increasing the blocksize limit at all." Com:
"Fine, we’ll all switch to Bitcoin Classic instead." BS:
"Hello Miners! Will you sign this agreement to only run Core software in exchange for us promising a 2MB non-witness-data hardfork?" Miners:
"Well, maybe, but only if the CEO of Blockstream signs." Adam: ...signs as CEO of Blockstream... Miners:
"Okay. Let’s see how much honor you have." Adam: ..revokes signature immediately to sign as “Individual”.. Miners:
"That’s dishonorable, but we’re not going to be dishonorable just because you are." BS:
"Actually, we changed our mind, we’re not going to deliver a 2MB hardfork to you either." Com:
"Looking more closely at Segwit, it’s a really ugly hack. It’s dead in the water. Give it up." BS:
"Segwit will get 95% support! We have talked to ALL the best companies!" Com:
"There is already 20% in opposition to Segwit. It’s impossible for it to achieve 95%." BS:
"Segwit is THE SCALING solution! It is an ACTUAL blocksize increase!" Com:
"We need a compromise to end this stalemate." BS:
"Segwit WAS and IS the compromise! There must be no blocksize limit increase! Segwit is the blocksize increase!"
...oh, so that explains it.
The old and effective Problem-Reaction-Solution strategy. Well, effective before the current social media era, in which hidden motives can be brought to the light of day to be exposed.
I will keep posting this until the very day of the fork, with the hope that more bitcoiners learn the true nature of S2X/B2X/NYA open attack on Bitcoin disguised as an "upgrade". This is a 2X Trojan Horse, and do you know who is inside that horse? Top level banker's special-forces like Blythe Masters, Larry Summers, Glenn Hutchins (sits on the board of The Federal Reserve Bank of New York) and DCG (Digital Currency Group)
We need to keep our efforts to expose and inform people about what S2X/NYA/DCG really is. Don't trust and don't do business with these companies and individuals supporting the S2X attack on Bitcoin.
Those guys are pure greed, they don't care about the 7 billion of people on this planet. Expose them and don't give them your business. Starve the beast. They will regret sticking with the B2X altcoin that will go the BCH way (and all the other highjack attempts before them). Moneybadger don't care and only gets stronger and immunized after each snake-bite.
Actually >99% of the Bitcoin community supports the real Bitcoin. The centralized B2X-coin attack is only supported by a handful of rich crooks and the people they've managed to bribe with their deep pockets:
Brian Armstrong, Fred Ehrsam (ex-Goldman Sacks), Bobby Lee, Winklevoss brothers, Peter Smith, Nic Cary, Haipo Yang, Rick Falkvinge, Jon Matonis, Wences Casares, Tony Gallippi, Mike Belshe, Ryan X Charles, Brian Hoffman/Sam Patterson/Chris Pacia (and all OB1 team), Gavin Andresen, Jeff Garzik, Mike Hearn, Roger Ver, Jihan Wu, John Mcaffe, Craig Wright, Barry Silbert, Larry Summers, Blythe Masters, Stephen Pair, Erik Voorhees, Vinny Lingham, Olivier Janssens, Jeremy Allaire, Peter Vessenes, Bruce Wagner, Brock Pierce, Aaron Voisine/Adam Traidman/Aaron Lasher (Breadwallet team), Glenn Hutchins, Bill Barhydt and Jiang Zhuoer.
I posted this 18 days ago: Exposed: How Bankers are trying to centralize and highjack Bitcoin by buying "supporters" and promoters (like OpenBazaar team) for the B2X (S2X/NYA) attack on Bitcoin.
TL;DR: B2X (S2X/NYA) is nothing more than an open attack on Bitcoin, not an "upgrade" as they want to sell it. This attack has no 'consensus', at all. It was "agreed" by a bunch of miners and corporations behind closed doors, with no community nor developers support. Only miners and a few millionaires that stand to profit from the B2X attack support it. The vast majority of the Bitcoin community is totally against this attack on Bitcoin. Most of those companies are under DCG group:
Every bitcoiner should know about what DCG (Digital Currency Group) is, and call out publicly the people that are working for the Corporations/Bankers against Bitcoin.
Edit: Brian Armstrong back on the list for this flip-flop
. And added Winklevoss Brothers for this
, and Bobby Lee for this
Hello Bitcoiners. I've been watching from the sidelines for awhile now and figured it is time to jump in the pool. I wanted to make a splash, so I decided to share my shocking epiphany on the volatility of Bitcoin.
Where I'm coming from
I believe Bitcoin's biggest hurdle will be that of government regulation but, at the same time, aided by other country's resentment of the PetroDollar and world reserve status the US dollar maintains. I believe in the mechanics and game theory of Bitcoin. I think it will succeed in taking over significant portions of the global economy because of its frictionless nature. I subscribe to the idea that bitcoin will either be worth zero, or very large amounts of money in the long run. It is just a matter of time while the general population learns to trust it as a store and transfer of value. Developers will do what they do and make it easier to use and overcome well known limitations of storage and bandwidth.
And then it came to me
With that, I would like to present some shock and awe that many people will struggle to comtemplate as the success of Bitcoin takes off: Price Volatility. There are three components that need to be considered: The scarce, fixed monetary units; The percentage of global markets bitcoin will capture; And a time frame. With these, you can begin to understand the staggering volatility that awaits us on the path to world adoption.
Due to the limited monetary units of Bitcoin, there is but one other parameter to tune to make Bitcoin a functional, competitive global currency - and that is the exchange rate. Multiply the exchange rate by the monetary units and you get the total monetary potential of the currency.
As of today, that's about 1.6 billion dollars of economic potential. That is it. If Bitcoin is to adopt respectable portions of the black market, gambling, remittance, and online commerce, the required target market cap must be in the trillions. And, again, the only way to get there, because of the fixed monetary units, is the exchange rate.
For Bitcoin to have a trillion dollars market potential, even after the maximum number of monetary units have been created, will be almost $50,000 per bitcoin. Now the question you are tasked to answer is: How long will it take bitcoin to reach a trillion dollar market capitalization? If we use the adoption rate of a similar technology, email, we can see that it took about 30 years. If we apply the same rate of adoption to Bitcoin and a potential trillion dollar market, we get an astounding figure.
Wait for it...
If, for a potential trillion dollar market you require each bitcoin to be valued at $50,000, and it will take 30 years to get to that value, we must expect, on average, the bitcoin value to rise approximately $140 a month. It sounds ridiculous, but do the math: $50,000 / (12 * 30) = $138.88. Edit for emphasis: And this rate will not be linear - it will be wildly volatile!
But that is the average increase over 30 years and there is no escaping the simple math behind it.
I recall someone once say that Bitcoin's biggest burden is its "too good to be true" properties. Nobody wants to hear your lies of instant global transfers that cost nothing and the indestructible money can't even be seized by governments - because its impossible and if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
But there you have some hard numbers to run for yourself. How would you change the numbers to breech the cognitive dissonance you're currently experiencing that prevents you from believing an average increase of $140 is a month a real possibility? I would like to thank Rick Falkvinge for his contribution of inspiration to this recent epiphany.
These past days, I have done a lot of thinking about bitcoin that ended up with me investing all of the money I had saved and all that I can borrow into the currency. Here’s why. In two posts now, I have considered the effects of bitcoin on society. A lot of more thinking has been done than has been described in writing, and it has resulted in me putting all my savings into this currency. Rick Falkvinge – What We Learn From This Bitcoin Correction:. Rick Falkvinge describes some lessons re-learned with Bitcoin’s recent exchange rate correct. Excerpts: “An exchange [Mt. Gox] that has a ten-minute lag in trading orders at best, and is completely unreachable at worst, can barely be taken seriously as a hobby project – and certainly not as the main hub of a next-generation ... Rick Falkvinge is an advocate for bitcoin cash (BCS) and the creator of the Swedish Pirate Party, a political party that lobbies for individual freedoms and reforms pertaining to file sharing, copyright and patents. Falkvinge began exploring bitcoin in 2011, and has described bitcoin as the “Napster of banking,” in reference to the former peer-to-peer… Di., 16. Mai 2017, 18:30: Our special guest at the next Bitcoin Exchange Berlin will be Rick Falkvinge, founder of the Pirate Party (when it was still libertarian), book author, blogger and Bitcoin pi Rick Falkvinge is an advocate for bitcoin cash (BCS) and the creator of the Swedish Pirate Party, a political party that lobbies for individual freedoms and reforms pertaining to file sharing, copyright and patents. Falkvinge began exploring bitcoin in 2011, and has described bitcoin as the “Napster of banking,” in reference to the former peer-to-peer…
BITCOIN WILL HIT $5 MILLION - Rick Falkvinge London Real - Duration: 4:54. London Real 296,156 views. 4:54. Andreas Antonopoulos - Bitcoin - PART 1/2 London Real - Duration: 46:47. ... Interview to Rick Falkvinge. This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue Rick Falkvinge, CEO of BitCoin Cash and founder of the Swedish Pirate Party on Bitcoin, crypto-currencies, and why they're here to stay. Aired on RT on Nov 20 2017. Bitcoin and the Blockchain Rick Falkvinge TEDxBucharest - Duration: 18:17. TEDx Talks 74,313 views. 18:17. Changing the world through swarm intelligence: Rick Falkvinge at TEDxOslo 2013 ... The internet brings much more changes than we could possibly ever imagine, typical of a very disruptive technology, as the generation who invents it can only...