How do "blades" get old? Can't they just give them a fresh coat of paint?
As long as new wind turbines are created, they should have a use. Legislate them like cell phone chargers. Stop letting manufacturers change the specs every 3 months to force everyone to buy new shit and junk the old shit.
This is a product of manufacturers getting subsidies from government and having unnatural incentives, its not really an indication that "solar is bad"
It's time we all get together. Let's do it now. Stop worrying about glow niggers infiltrating. Make it something that we don't care if they infiltrate. Group of like minded individuals getting to know each other on a personal level and building trust. Grow organically. Work towards our own best interests in whatever way is most beneficial. Start with organizing resources in case of pandemic/war/etc. Identify who has what skills. Organize geographic resources, where can we group up? Organize politically, who should run for what office, how can we help each other? If armed defense is necessary, we should prepare for that, develop those skills. We need to start right now...
I've always had terrible luck and no tricks have ever worked for me. The best I've found is using a spoon to get under the shell and peel off the rest of the shell
You're missing the whole enchilada. Most crypto is a scam. Bitcoin is a revolution, and it's changing the world.
By the way, it's not "crypto" that's requiring KYC, it's fiat. Whenever you give fiat for crypto and the other party wants to identify you, it's because of the fiat. You're anger is misdirected.
Start using bureaucratic tactics against them. Don't resign, but also don't follow the orders. And don't say no. Just delay, make excuses, make mistakes, bring the executive branch to a stand still. If you resign, they hand pick someone that will obey. If you pretend like you're trying to follow orders, but don't, they have to figure out what's happening first.
Sounds like the sales pitch you'd hear for the new thing they call E* mail back in the early 90s.
"Do you want to have to buy fancy equipment, pay for an expensive internet connection, and learn to use the command line to send digital messages that the recipient has to be a computer genius to know how to receive? Then maybe E* mail is for you..."
You can make anything sound retarded if you willfully ignore every useful feature, embellish every flaw, ignore solutions in the pipeline that haven't quite matured yet, and pretend like technology is not going to continue advancing...
But hey, if you enjoy getting slowly raped by the inflation "they" cause while they slowly pilfer your saving, and sometimes just outright confiscate it, then fiat is definitely for you.
Definitely ignore this new technology that would give you control because you're too lazy to learn about it.
And totally try to post funny memes to convince others you're right so you can feel more content with your choice.
You say that like its a fact. You may be right, I see the allegations. But I don't know either way. I do know this, the allegation is that Musk kicked out the inventor of Tesla in 2007. Tesla didn't IPO until 2009. From 2009 until 2022, musk was indisputably (or do you contest that also?) at the head of Tesla and led it to a Trillion dollar market cap. You don't luck into being the richest person in the world. He's a genius, whether he's honest or unscrupulous, the man's a genius. I can acknowledge any allegation you present as potentially true, it doesn't change my mind that he's a genius.
For all the allegations about Musk being a conman that you choose to believe, I'm surprised you so easily dismiss all the arguments that CW is a conman. Musk is the richest man in the world, CW, the man who claims to have invented bitcoin - claims he lost his bitcoin private keys... Could all be true, but the absurdity of that statement makes it impossible for me to believe him. There could also be a tea pot floating behind the moon. But its absurd and I'm not going to spend my time investigating it. And also, it doesn't matter... Even if CW is Satoshi, the world has spoken. Bitcoins are 400x more valuable. The white paper states, the longest chain is the "real" bitcoin. If he wanted to claim he was Satoshi in the future, to obtain more influence than his opinions earn on their own, he made a very key strategic mistake by releasing bitcoin under a pseudonym and not retaining any indisputable proof to use in the future (like his private keys). Not very smart IMHO...
I don't care to argue about whether CW is Satoshi. If there's a specific argument CW makes about BSV vs Bitcoin that you'd like to discuss (block size, protocol, whether LN is real bitcoin, etc), I'm happy to have a technical/theoretical discussion about something specific. The only way CW can prove he's Satoshi is to find his keys, until then, I don't care.
I'm working with tth776 - I'm happy with what he's provided so far, I'm waiting on the final product with small tweaks and then I'm going to send him his money.
I haven't researched Musk outside of what I've organically come across over the years, so perhaps you're right. But I don't hold his lack of public speaking against him. I think I'm very intelligent, but I know I sound like a complete moron when forced to speak publicly. That's just not my strength. And I don't think you can give anyone but him credit for Tesla (right?), and that's made him the richest man on the planet, so you've got to at least give him that. I was excited about TSLA when it IPO'd, and its done nothing but impress me since.
I saw that the CW lawsuit happened, but I didn't follow it more than reading the occasional headline. You are correct that him being Satoshi and BSV losing could both be true.
Why now (or circa 2016)? Satoshi invented bitcoin under a pseudonym for a reason. He could have identified himself at any time when he was on the forums (although credential compromise claims could have been made). He could unequivocally identify himself now with private keys to the genesis block (although, hacking claims could be made there also, I guess). Truth is, I guess any argument for someone being Satoshi could be doubted. And I haven't followed it enough to even know what his arguments are. But honestly, I don't think it really matters.
Bitcoin not having a figure head is important. The blockchain can split (BTC/BCH/BSV/...) and people will follow the one they choose to follow. The "core developers" and forum moderators (/r/bitcoin) already have too much influence IMO. If a "Satoshi" was annointed, that would allow a single person to effectively dictate the direction of Bitcoin. Sure, people would still choose, but his opinion would carry so much weight that he would be hard to challenge, even if he was wrong. In true 4chan fashion, everyone is anonymous, ideas stand on their own merit. If Craig is or is not Satoshi, I don't really care. Nobody is stopping him from creating BSV. If that is the "correct" system, it will win out in the end. Stop wasting time and money suing people to have the courts declare you the chosen one, put that energy into putting forth compelling arguments for your vision and influencing the masses.
I'm much more interested in taking the time to go down the rabbit holes on his individual ideas (why is SW or LN bad, what would be better?) than I am in trying to figure out if he's actually Satoshi.
You seem intelligent, I'm open minded - well, sort of. I'm pretty hard headed b/c I've done a ton of research to come to the conclusions I've come to. I'm not going to change my mind by reading the standard arguments from the other side - I've already read those and took those into consideration. But if you present something I haven't seen, or can show me a different way to think about what I've already seen, I'm definitely open to changing my mind. I don't have a vested interest in my current conclusions that would lead me to irrationally support them in the face of a compelling argument against them.
If you want to throw something together, that'd be cool. Do you have an email address so we could communicate outside of voat?
I'm really just looking for something quick and easy. I don't know that I'd recognize good anyway...
I would like a ballpark of what you think would be fair compensation for your time and how long you'd guess you'd spend on it. I don't want you to work for free.
I realize you'll need more specifics for a ballpark on time - but I'd rather discuss privately.
I felt exactly like him in 2017 when this war took place. I hated Seg Wit and Lightening Network, not because I'd done the research... but because I hate stifling free speech, and the side that appeared to be stifling free speech was the side that was pro SegWit/LN/small blocks. Also, the white paper released by Satoshi did seem to imply that that block size should rise over time as hardware improves. Their arguments made sense to me. However... I knew that I just didn't know. And I already had what I had, so I was in a good position. The chain split between BTC and BCH and I had both, so I could wait to see who won. Which, by the way, is also in the white paper - the longest chain IS bitcoin. That is determined by people putting their money where their mouth is.
In the years since, I've thought about this a lot. I've always had the nagging thought in the back of my mind. How does bitcoin scale? 1MB/s is somewhere between 8-30 transactions/s based on which protocol you use. Visa is processing 40k t/s. And that's not all the world's transactions, that's just Visa. To get just Visa's throughput through bitcoin with 30 t/s = 1MB, you'd have to make 10 minute blocks 1.3GB to get 40k t/s. This is not going to scale for a system that never removes old transactions. The blockchain would have to be stored in a large data farm in the not too distant future. I thought to myself, someone has to solve this for bitcoin to have a chance... Also, the 10m confirmations for a transaction, the transaction fees during congestion - it just wasn't feasible to use bitcoin as an actual currency IMO.
So now, several years later, I never really researched SegWit, but I did research LN. In the 2017 war, LN was called a side chain and not real bitcoin. But I finally got around to reading the technical document on how LN works.
https://github.com/lnbook/lnbook
It basically uses multi-sig wallets and partially signed transactions to allow people to "send" bitcoin back and forth without requiring a transaction on the block chain, but enabling anyone to settle on the blockchain at any time. Its actually genius. I got really excited as I read how it was implemented. I could see this solved all three problems I'd had for years. It allows for instant transactions, very low cost transactions, and scales infinitely. It uses onion routing to connect LN channels for convenience. When I understood it, I was completely sold on Bitcoin being the future of money. Both daily spending and saving.
I still haven't researched SegWit. I probably should, but I just don't have the time to do everything I want to do in life... I also haven't researched Eth/Monero/etc/etc/etc enough.
Now, the guy in the video is trying to make SegWit sound bad, but he says things that make me think he isn't thinking about it the right way. He talks about the economics not making sense with SegWit. He says miners HAVE to have each transaction have more transaction fees. To me, the miners have to have enough money to make mining profitable. That's it. If they do, they'll mine - If they don't, they won't. If BTC becomes more valuable, and people are willing to pay more for it, miners can receive significantly less BTC and effectively receive more value. Nobody knows exactly what this looks like in 2140 when the last bitcoin is mined. Basically, his argument doesn't convince me of anything. Then he starts talking about using competitors (alt coins), which I don't believe will be a thing in 20 years. Bitcoin is going to win, alt coins are going to be novelties at best.
These articles explain why Bitcoin (whatever wins) will be the only crypto, long-term.
Also, halfway through the video, I noticed in the description a link to craigwright.net and a comment that links to a Craig Wright video and calls him the "inventor of Bitcoin".
I've seen enough. I think the likelihood of Craig Wright being Satoshi is so low that I don't care what else this guy has to say. The inventor of bitcoin wouldn't "lose the keys" to the origin block. The true Satoshi (if he/she/they is/are still alive) could easily prove his identity. I'm personally in the camp that thinks Hal Finney was Satoshi. Very sad that he took his own life before getting to see how big Bitcoin has become.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUOYJvubJKA
And here it is, he says BSV is the real bitcoin. If he's right, he should be ecstatic that people are fooled into thinking BTC is the real bitcoin. People are showing they're willing to pay $40k+ for a REAL bitcoin. BSV is only $110/each right now. He should be buying all of them so that when people realize BSV is the real bitcoin, he'll be rich as hell.
Then he goes on to trash Elon Musk and Michael Saylor. Elon Musk is a genius. Its possible he could get scammed. But he co-founded the startup that became PayPal. He started Tesla/SpaceX/Solar City/Hyperloop/OpenAI/etc. I've listened to him talk for hours on various podcasts. He's eccentric, but undeniably a genius. Way smarter than I could ever hope to be. And he invested in Bitcoin, which is currently very valuable. And I'm supposed to listen to this random dude with no credentials who's pushing BSV?? Sorry, he may even be correct, but unless I'm willing to do enough research to truly understand, I can only go on the facts I know. Elon Musk is a genius winner. This guy, I've never heard of him. I don't believe him. If there's some specific point he makes that you'd like to discuss, I'd take the time to comment on it. But my response is already WAY too long...
The main network can't support a large enough number of transactions for the public nature of the network to matter. Most transactions will move to the Lightening Network. The public blockchain will enable the citizens to audit the government, while the LN will prevent the government from monitoring the citizens.
I retired in my 30's. You could say I got lucky, that's what most people say, but that's just sour grapes. I recognized the possibilities early and bought an almost meaningless amount of bitcoin when it was basically worthless. I wasn't a true believer until I read and understood how the Lightening Network works. As a true believer, I have a retirement amount of money in bitcoin and no interest in diversifying into the stock market casino that the Fed decides to crash every 10ish years, banks where you get a consistent loss of value when accounting for inflation, or cash which is even worse. I could try investing in art I guess, but that seems silly. If I'm wrong, my money is where my mouth is and I'll live or die with my choice. But I'm all in and I feel great about it.
jammicsmith 1 point 3.2 years ago
It's probably past time to start alternate/parallel services to what icann provides.
/v/BigBadTech viewpost?postid=621ee06786340
jammicsmith 1 point 3.2 years ago
So annoying. I left godaddy for namecheap when godaddy got woke. Guess it's time to move again.
/v/BigBadTech viewpost?postid=621ee06786340
jammicsmith 0 points 3.2 years ago
How do "blades" get old? Can't they just give them a fresh coat of paint?
As long as new wind turbines are created, they should have a use. Legislate them like cell phone chargers. Stop letting manufacturers change the specs every 3 months to force everyone to buy new shit and junk the old shit.
This is a product of manufacturers getting subsidies from government and having unnatural incentives, its not really an indication that "solar is bad"
/v/ClimateChangeSkeptic viewpost?postid=621d5a938c86c
jammicsmith 0 points 3.2 years ago
The CIA better use anonymous for cover. If Russia retaliates, Joe already sent them a 16 point target list.
/v/WorldNews viewpost?postid=6218436c99645
jammicsmith 0 points 3.2 years ago
Also symbolic because they're gay as shit
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=621848c6a82ff
jammicsmith 3 points 3.2 years ago
It's time we all get together. Let's do it now. Stop worrying about glow niggers infiltrating. Make it something that we don't care if they infiltrate. Group of like minded individuals getting to know each other on a personal level and building trust. Grow organically. Work towards our own best interests in whatever way is most beneficial. Start with organizing resources in case of pandemic/war/etc. Identify who has what skills. Organize geographic resources, where can we group up? Organize politically, who should run for what office, how can we help each other? If armed defense is necessary, we should prepare for that, develop those skills. We need to start right now...
/v/Russia viewpost?postid=621761c8ddf73
jammicsmith 0 points 3.2 years ago
I've always had terrible luck and no tricks have ever worked for me. The best I've found is using a spoon to get under the shell and peel off the rest of the shell
/v/Food viewpost?postid=62131576b4ee0
jammicsmith 1 point 3.2 years ago
You're missing the whole enchilada. Most crypto is a scam. Bitcoin is a revolution, and it's changing the world.
By the way, it's not "crypto" that's requiring KYC, it's fiat. Whenever you give fiat for crypto and the other party wants to identify you, it's because of the fiat. You're anger is misdirected.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=6210eb80a2ee3
jammicsmith 3 points 3.2 years ago
Lol, "bad diets"= bacon and eggs. Right... definitely not the take out Chinese food and pizza delivery.
/v/memesharing viewpost?postid=620e6ffcbda81
jammicsmith 0 points 3.2 years ago
People need to stop resigning!
Start using bureaucratic tactics against them. Don't resign, but also don't follow the orders. And don't say no. Just delay, make excuses, make mistakes, bring the executive branch to a stand still. If you resign, they hand pick someone that will obey. If you pretend like you're trying to follow orders, but don't, they have to figure out what's happening first.
/v/news viewpost?postid=620bd91158173
jammicsmith 0 points 3.2 years ago
Sounds like the sales pitch you'd hear for the new thing they call E* mail back in the early 90s.
"Do you want to have to buy fancy equipment, pay for an expensive internet connection, and learn to use the command line to send digital messages that the recipient has to be a computer genius to know how to receive? Then maybe E* mail is for you..."
You can make anything sound retarded if you willfully ignore every useful feature, embellish every flaw, ignore solutions in the pipeline that haven't quite matured yet, and pretend like technology is not going to continue advancing...
But hey, if you enjoy getting slowly raped by the inflation "they" cause while they slowly pilfer your saving, and sometimes just outright confiscate it, then fiat is definitely for you.
Definitely ignore this new technology that would give you control because you're too lazy to learn about it.
And totally try to post funny memes to convince others you're right so you can feel more content with your choice.
/v/Crypto viewpost?postid=62017b45a807f
jammicsmith 4 points 3.2 years ago
Fucking brutal
/v/Beaners viewpost?postid=6201832ed6c25
jammicsmith 9 points 3.2 years ago
Democratic party? They
control both parties... they infiltrate and control every organization with central authority that they deem important.
Can't wait for a decentralized political structure to be designed. Give us a decentralized media as well and we might be able to right the ship
/v/WakeUpWhitePeople viewpost?postid=61fcb7485ce02
jammicsmith 0 points 3.2 years ago
He said we only had a couple years, 35 years ago. What's happening today sure seems like what he's describing, but his timeline is way off
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=61fab132a75ec
jammicsmith 0 points 3.2 years ago
Maybe he's pulling the shape-shifting trick.
/v/Covid1984 viewpost?postid=61f8aabebb861
jammicsmith 0 points 3.3 years ago
Well congrats to you. Feels great to finally be free from morons telling me what to do.
/v/AskVoat viewpost?postid=61e5c7842f18f
jammicsmith 0 points 3.3 years ago
> Also Craig Wright didn't sue anybody
https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2021/02/05/square-led-consortium-challenges-craig-wrights-bitcoin-white-paper-claim/
Who publicly and anonymously releases the Bitcoin whitepaper and then tells people they aren't allowed to host it... that's DAF.
/v/AskVoat viewpost?postid=61e5c7842f18f
jammicsmith 0 points 3.3 years ago
You say that like its a fact. You may be right, I see the allegations. But I don't know either way. I do know this, the allegation is that Musk kicked out the inventor of Tesla in 2007. Tesla didn't IPO until 2009. From 2009 until 2022, musk was indisputably (or do you contest that also?) at the head of Tesla and led it to a Trillion dollar market cap. You don't luck into being the richest person in the world. He's a genius, whether he's honest or unscrupulous, the man's a genius. I can acknowledge any allegation you present as potentially true, it doesn't change my mind that he's a genius.
For all the allegations about Musk being a conman that you choose to believe, I'm surprised you so easily dismiss all the arguments that CW is a conman. Musk is the richest man in the world, CW, the man who claims to have invented bitcoin - claims he lost his bitcoin private keys... Could all be true, but the absurdity of that statement makes it impossible for me to believe him. There could also be a tea pot floating behind the moon. But its absurd and I'm not going to spend my time investigating it. And also, it doesn't matter... Even if CW is Satoshi, the world has spoken. Bitcoins are 400x more valuable. The white paper states, the longest chain is the "real" bitcoin. If he wanted to claim he was Satoshi in the future, to obtain more influence than his opinions earn on their own, he made a very key strategic mistake by releasing bitcoin under a pseudonym and not retaining any indisputable proof to use in the future (like his private keys). Not very smart IMHO...
I don't care to argue about whether CW is Satoshi. If there's a specific argument CW makes about BSV vs Bitcoin that you'd like to discuss (block size, protocol, whether LN is real bitcoin, etc), I'm happy to have a technical/theoretical discussion about something specific. The only way CW can prove he's Satoshi is to find his keys, until then, I don't care.
/v/AskVoat viewpost?postid=61e5c7842f18f
jammicsmith 0 points 3.3 years ago
I'm working with tth776 - I'm happy with what he's provided so far, I'm waiting on the final product with small tweaks and then I'm going to send him his money.
/v/AskVoat viewpost?postid=61e86f8e742a9
jammicsmith 0 points 3.3 years ago
I haven't researched Musk outside of what I've organically come across over the years, so perhaps you're right. But I don't hold his lack of public speaking against him. I think I'm very intelligent, but I know I sound like a complete moron when forced to speak publicly. That's just not my strength. And I don't think you can give anyone but him credit for Tesla (right?), and that's made him the richest man on the planet, so you've got to at least give him that. I was excited about TSLA when it IPO'd, and its done nothing but impress me since.
I saw that the CW lawsuit happened, but I didn't follow it more than reading the occasional headline. You are correct that him being Satoshi and BSV losing could both be true.
Why now (or circa 2016)? Satoshi invented bitcoin under a pseudonym for a reason. He could have identified himself at any time when he was on the forums (although credential compromise claims could have been made). He could unequivocally identify himself now with private keys to the genesis block (although, hacking claims could be made there also, I guess). Truth is, I guess any argument for someone being Satoshi could be doubted. And I haven't followed it enough to even know what his arguments are. But honestly, I don't think it really matters.
Bitcoin not having a figure head is important. The blockchain can split (BTC/BCH/BSV/...) and people will follow the one they choose to follow. The "core developers" and forum moderators (/r/bitcoin) already have too much influence IMO. If a "Satoshi" was annointed, that would allow a single person to effectively dictate the direction of Bitcoin. Sure, people would still choose, but his opinion would carry so much weight that he would be hard to challenge, even if he was wrong. In true 4chan fashion, everyone is anonymous, ideas stand on their own merit. If Craig is or is not Satoshi, I don't really care. Nobody is stopping him from creating BSV. If that is the "correct" system, it will win out in the end. Stop wasting time and money suing people to have the courts declare you the chosen one, put that energy into putting forth compelling arguments for your vision and influencing the masses.
I'm much more interested in taking the time to go down the rabbit holes on his individual ideas (why is SW or LN bad, what would be better?) than I am in trying to figure out if he's actually Satoshi.
You seem intelligent, I'm open minded - well, sort of. I'm pretty hard headed b/c I've done a ton of research to come to the conclusions I've come to. I'm not going to change my mind by reading the standard arguments from the other side - I've already read those and took those into consideration. But if you present something I haven't seen, or can show me a different way to think about what I've already seen, I'm definitely open to changing my mind. I don't have a vested interest in my current conclusions that would lead me to irrationally support them in the face of a compelling argument against them.
/v/AskVoat viewpost?postid=61e5c7842f18f
jammicsmith 6 points 3.3 years ago
That looks like it cuts out right before turning into some weird gay porno.
/v/funny viewpost?postid=61e87f288a7bb
jammicsmith 1 point 3.3 years ago
If you want to throw something together, that'd be cool. Do you have an email address so we could communicate outside of voat?
I'm really just looking for something quick and easy. I don't know that I'd recognize good anyway...
I would like a ballpark of what you think would be fair compensation for your time and how long you'd guess you'd spend on it. I don't want you to work for free.
I realize you'll need more specifics for a ballpark on time - but I'd rather discuss privately.
/v/AskVoat viewpost?postid=61e86f8e742a9
jammicsmith 0 points 3.3 years ago
> https://youtu.be/ABg67HsixIA
I felt exactly like him in 2017 when this war took place. I hated Seg Wit and Lightening Network, not because I'd done the research... but because I hate stifling free speech, and the side that appeared to be stifling free speech was the side that was pro SegWit/LN/small blocks. Also, the white paper released by Satoshi did seem to imply that that block size should rise over time as hardware improves. Their arguments made sense to me. However... I knew that I just didn't know. And I already had what I had, so I was in a good position. The chain split between BTC and BCH and I had both, so I could wait to see who won. Which, by the way, is also in the white paper - the longest chain IS bitcoin. That is determined by people putting their money where their mouth is.
In the years since, I've thought about this a lot. I've always had the nagging thought in the back of my mind. How does bitcoin scale? 1MB/s is somewhere between 8-30 transactions/s based on which protocol you use. Visa is processing 40k t/s. And that's not all the world's transactions, that's just Visa. To get just Visa's throughput through bitcoin with 30 t/s = 1MB, you'd have to make 10 minute blocks 1.3GB to get 40k t/s. This is not going to scale for a system that never removes old transactions. The blockchain would have to be stored in a large data farm in the not too distant future. I thought to myself, someone has to solve this for bitcoin to have a chance... Also, the 10m confirmations for a transaction, the transaction fees during congestion - it just wasn't feasible to use bitcoin as an actual currency IMO.
So now, several years later, I never really researched SegWit, but I did research LN. In the 2017 war, LN was called a side chain and not real bitcoin. But I finally got around to reading the technical document on how LN works.
https://github.com/lnbook/lnbook
It basically uses multi-sig wallets and partially signed transactions to allow people to "send" bitcoin back and forth without requiring a transaction on the block chain, but enabling anyone to settle on the blockchain at any time. Its actually genius. I got really excited as I read how it was implemented. I could see this solved all three problems I'd had for years. It allows for instant transactions, very low cost transactions, and scales infinitely. It uses onion routing to connect LN channels for convenience. When I understood it, I was completely sold on Bitcoin being the future of money. Both daily spending and saving.
I still haven't researched SegWit. I probably should, but I just don't have the time to do everything I want to do in life... I also haven't researched Eth/Monero/etc/etc/etc enough.
Now, the guy in the video is trying to make SegWit sound bad, but he says things that make me think he isn't thinking about it the right way. He talks about the economics not making sense with SegWit. He says miners HAVE to have each transaction have more transaction fees. To me, the miners have to have enough money to make mining profitable. That's it. If they do, they'll mine - If they don't, they won't. If BTC becomes more valuable, and people are willing to pay more for it, miners can receive significantly less BTC and effectively receive more value. Nobody knows exactly what this looks like in 2140 when the last bitcoin is mined. Basically, his argument doesn't convince me of anything. Then he starts talking about using competitors (alt coins), which I don't believe will be a thing in 20 years. Bitcoin is going to win, alt coins are going to be novelties at best.
These articles explain why Bitcoin (whatever wins) will be the only crypto, long-term.
https://armantheparman.com/why-bitcoin-only/
https://www.bitrawr.com/bitcoin-maximalism-explained
Also, halfway through the video, I noticed in the description a link to craigwright.net and a comment that links to a Craig Wright video and calls him the "inventor of Bitcoin".
I've seen enough. I think the likelihood of Craig Wright being Satoshi is so low that I don't care what else this guy has to say. The inventor of bitcoin wouldn't "lose the keys" to the origin block. The true Satoshi (if he/she/they is/are still alive) could easily prove his identity. I'm personally in the camp that thinks Hal Finney was Satoshi. Very sad that he took his own life before getting to see how big Bitcoin has become.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUOYJvubJKA
And here it is, he says BSV is the real bitcoin. If he's right, he should be ecstatic that people are fooled into thinking BTC is the real bitcoin. People are showing they're willing to pay $40k+ for a REAL bitcoin. BSV is only $110/each right now. He should be buying all of them so that when people realize BSV is the real bitcoin, he'll be rich as hell.
Then he goes on to trash Elon Musk and Michael Saylor. Elon Musk is a genius. Its possible he could get scammed. But he co-founded the startup that became PayPal. He started Tesla/SpaceX/Solar City/Hyperloop/OpenAI/etc. I've listened to him talk for hours on various podcasts. He's eccentric, but undeniably a genius. Way smarter than I could ever hope to be. And he invested in Bitcoin, which is currently very valuable. And I'm supposed to listen to this random dude with no credentials who's pushing BSV?? Sorry, he may even be correct, but unless I'm willing to do enough research to truly understand, I can only go on the facts I know. Elon Musk is a genius winner. This guy, I've never heard of him. I don't believe him. If there's some specific point he makes that you'd like to discuss, I'd take the time to comment on it. But my response is already WAY too long...
/v/AskVoat viewpost?postid=61e5c7842f18f
jammicsmith 0 points 3.3 years ago
The main network can't support a large enough number of transactions for the public nature of the network to matter. Most transactions will move to the Lightening Network. The public blockchain will enable the citizens to audit the government, while the LN will prevent the government from monitoring the citizens.
/v/AskVoat viewpost?postid=61e5c7842f18f
jammicsmith 1 point 3.3 years ago
I retired in my 30's. You could say I got lucky, that's what most people say, but that's just sour grapes. I recognized the possibilities early and bought an almost meaningless amount of bitcoin when it was basically worthless. I wasn't a true believer until I read and understood how the Lightening Network works. As a true believer, I have a retirement amount of money in bitcoin and no interest in diversifying into the stock market casino that the Fed decides to crash every 10ish years, banks where you get a consistent loss of value when accounting for inflation, or cash which is even worse. I could try investing in art I guess, but that seems silly. If I'm wrong, my money is where my mouth is and I'll live or die with my choice. But I'm all in and I feel great about it.
/v/AskVoat viewpost?postid=61e5c7842f18f