You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: If You Want To Understand Why I am So Passionate About Bitcoin - Watch This Speech
I think the "childishness" of your reply speaks for itself.
Learn to differentiate between a rhetorical and a genuine question.
Learn to differentiate between when I break down the logic of your statements, vs making a strawman of what you said. Etc.
I don't see any valid retorts to my arguments.
Just as a sidenote, the person who came up with the term "hyperbitcoinization" (for a concept that I have neither rejected nor contradicted here) was himself finally shunned as he became critical of Core.
Centralized btrash is equal to the peering green eyes of the all-knowing governmental overlords and its paper stained with the greasy fingerprints of your banks and your mints. No thanks.
Neat argument. Bitcoin Cash is exactly what we had back in 2010 and then some.
It's not centralized. It's "fully decentralized".
SPVs "don't need to trust nodes" they can ask for Proof of Work.
Your new "Bitcoin standard" is "Banking 2.0". It's not the same Bitcoin standard we discussed so many years ago now.
Now changing essentials of the way transactions are made is considered ok, but hardforking is considered a risk?
It's all backwards.
The valid statements provided are undenial facts and none of which can be debated
Neat that you noticed. No counter arguments were provided. Cyberblocks arguments all assume central planning of internal fees, liquidity and deflation, while also assuming sheer stupidity of any dissenters of this mode of operation.
Bitcoin was not designed to rely on central planning. An emergency fork to restore the order was needed at this point. Whether it survives or no, that we'll have to see.
But you can't excuse the developers intentionally planning for
A genius plan to some and I'm ashamed to admit that I encouraged it. It doesn't make sense in reality and won't help establish Bitcoin as a currency, cash, money or in the long run even "digital gold".
It's a failed economic policy that relies on active management.
So you then counter with... "but Roger"?
Impressive argument...
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
If that was really it... yes, that's pretty funny. :P
Roger that lol
lol I'm not sure what to say here? :D Are you completely sincere about your views here or just looking to crack a joke or what? Anyway, you made me smile today so good job on that I suppose ^^ =)