...
Ok so I was just confirming, that basically you are saying BTC wil become irrelevant because it will no longer "do what it says on the tin"
Ok so I was just confirming, that basically you are saying BTC wil become irrelevant because it will no longer "do what it says on the tin"
First, some housekeeping.
Sentences end with a period. Ellipsis: three dots. Take the extra dots in your ellipses and stick them at the end of your sentences. Put the rest in your pocket--sell them to your friends.
Again, I did not say "will" (or "wil [sic]").
Try putting moar care into reading than you do into writing.
Quote
and you do not know what "a solution to centralization means?"
well, you infer that Bitcoin was only relevant because it is decentralised .........what made it relevant? because it was offering a solution to ...... ... ... centralisation..... right or no?
well, you infer that Bitcoin was only relevant because it is decentralised .........what made it relevant? because it was offering a solution to ...... ... ... centralisation..... right or no?
No. I Bitcoin is a solution to money. It never tried to offer a "solution to centralization" because centralization need to be solved as much as peanut butter.
Being decentralized helps Bitcoin. Being centralized hurts Bitcoin. How can I make this any simpler 4 U?
@empowering: But I have just gave you a concrete, non-trivial, and common example of the semantics not being semantics at all!
...stealing and fraud are still stealing and fraud...
But many people here call taxes stealing. Do you see how petty semantics aren't petty semantics, and that attempting to formalize shit and reconcile different interpretations of "what's right" gave us The Body Of Law?