All posts made by Trolfi in Bitcointalk.org's Wall Observer thread
1.
Post 10177111 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.50h):
Hello World.
Allow me to introduce myself: I am Trolfi; my mission is to protect as many good people as I can from making mistakes in the marketplace. I shall share my superior insight to alert you of pitfalls, scams, and as many possible ways in which anything could go wrong as I can humanly come up with. I shall do it in steady, avuncular tone.
Please do not ignore me.
2.
Post 10177339 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.50h):
Total transacion fees are experiencing an unexplained 5.64% increase YTD. Comparison with benchmark period suggests a possible price drop. Please trade carefully.
3.
Post 10177506 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.50h):
Thanks for the link! It is of great academic interest.
BTW, did you notice that average growth in visits to Bitcoin Stack Exchange is -2.64% over the last 365 day period?
4.
Post 10221136 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.51h):
What will Coinbase do with all that money, I wonder?
Continue developing their platform and expanding their user base. Position themselves to become one of the most valuable tech/finance companies in the planet.
But you must know better than the people over at NYSE, Citigroup, BBVA, USAA and NTT. After all, you are a Sr. Member now.
5.
Post 10223376 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.51h):
My ego is bursting.
We know, we know.
Tell us again how in your view Vikram Pandit is stupid and ill-informed.
6.
Post 10224086 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.51h):
Tell us again how in your view Vikram Pandit is stupid and ill-informed.
How many bitcoins did he buy?
I have no way of knowing that but I am quite certain he did not invest in Coinbase while expecting BTC to tank.
7.
Post 10224287 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.51h):
Indeed, it is puzzling why Coinbase, of all bitcon companies, is getting so much investment. Perhaps it is going to be more than just a bitcoin payment processor?
On your model, they are going to be installing a bunch of ATMs.
By the way, tell us again how in your view Warren Buffett is stupid and ill-informed.
I have no such views. Buffett is not in a position to understand bitcoin, and he knows it. Thus he stays away from the space, and wisely advises the same for those equally placed.
8.
Post 10261709 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.53h):
so if I want troll you I just post here and you will see?
Yes, but you'll have to wait your turn, the line starts over there.
Let me get this.
Stolfi, do yourself a favor and post an address. We'll send you a couple of bits. You will look too silly (to yourself and others) if you end up not getting any BTC before the masses do.
9.
Post 10282691 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.53h):
So... Now that we know each other and practically family, how many of these here valuable shiny coins are you gonna be wantin'?
For now, I think I will just increase my holdings by 50%, just because you insist.
How many times are you going to make this joke?
Sheesh.
10.
Post 10511179 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.59h):
Looking for advice about women is a sure sign that you are not ready to cope with the concept yet.
You got that one right. See, it's not that hard.
11.
Post 10514021 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.59h):
Do you really think every little swing in this or any market can be correlated with news? Do you really think it's worthwile to try? Really?
12.
Post 10624989 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.01h):
I've been in contact with the actual Jorge Stolfi--he himself disavows any knowledge of the imposter here who spends his days arguing with kids about Bitcoin
really!
either that, or he's also trollin' IRL . . .
13.
Post 10625320 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.01h):
I've been in contact with the actual Jorge Stolfi--he himself disavows any knowledge of the imposter here who spends his days arguing with kids about Bitcoin, and whose posts coincidentally occur near the end of "troll waves" where all the trolls and their sock puppets quote each other to reinforce a point.
You mean
that imposter? Ha. Don't pay attention to him. He is actually Satoshi Nakamoto, trying to save his experiment from us trolls -- the only attack vector that bitcoin was not designed to survive.
Troll admits to trolling while you are out parsing his words . . .
14.
Post 10625461 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.01h):
i think what "Stolfi" wants to know is the *real* value of a bitcoin. You know, figure out what it's really worth.
15.
Post 10626041 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.01h):
"Stolfi's" Rule of Sound Money: if it has no mass, it has no value.
Ageless advice.
16.
Post 10632024 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.01h):
Moreover, no one really knows how hard it is to compute a valid block. The trial-and-error method used by miners is just the most efficient method that we know; but there is no proof or other evidence that there is no better way. There may well exist an agorithm that finds the right nonce for a block header in a few microseconds. Or, worse, finds a block that has the same hash of another block but a different contents, including a specific transaction that is not in the first block. Or finds the private key for any given address. So, the theoretical "mass cost" of computing a valid block may be orders of magnitude lower than the trial-and-error cost.
Yes, we may also be brains in a vat. Or, you may walk outside and a piano may fall on your head. Also, the law of gravity may cease being in force tomorrow at 0:00 GMT.
A lot of things may happen.
You should therefore stay at home and not take any risks at all. Except, of course, that may cause you to autocombust.
17.
Post 10632673 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.01h):
There may well exist an algorithm that finds the right nonce for a block header in a few microseconds.
There may. And whoever finds it, is rich. The incentive could not be any clearer.
Et pourtant . . .
18.
Post 10736209 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.04h):
where is lambchop?
19.
Post 10794069 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.04h):
Lamby!
20.
Post 10804518 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.05h):
I was traveling for work since March 09. Eight days without hearing, reading, writing or saying the word "bitcoin". Logged back in today March/17 at about 14:00 UTC. I see that the price hasn't changed much, has it?
It's back to business then. I'll have to report that while forum members explicitly expressed concerned over Lambchop's absence, nobody seemed to miss you.
You inaugurate your return by implying that price stability is a bad thing. Not that you like volatility. Come to think about it, you are not comfortable with BTC having a price and being traded at all.
So yes, you are back. Yipee.
21.
Post 10808150 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.05h):
You have spent hundreds of hours looking for points of failure, honed them ad nauseam, and these 6 issues are the best you can come up with? Gosh, if anything, I'd say that is a most compelling argument for the technology.
Thanks for providing such diligent service, "Stolfi". It is very useful. I do mean it.
What are the problems with bitcoin??
Some problems:
* Centralization of mining seems inevitable.
* There is no mechanism to stabilize the value.
* Limited supply leads to expectations of high value which leads to hoarding instead of use.
* Block reward leads to a hyperdeveloped mining industry supported by investors rather than by users.
* For most people, irreversibility is a serious defect, not a feature.
* Risk of theft is too high for people who are not computer experts.
And maybe more.
I am sure that millions of people don't think like you do.
Perhaps a million people have a reasonable understanding of bitcoin and believe in its eventual succeess. Probably millions of people also have a reasonable understanding of bitcoin but do
not believe in its eventual success. The other 7000 million either haven't heard of it, or have heard of it but don't care to know more, or know just enough to dismiss it.
22.
Post 10808761 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.05h):
Looking forward to your pension?
Whoa. 40% slump. Sounds too volatile and inflationary for mainstream use.
Since you bring it up, let's speak about the Real and the Ministry of Finance /Banco Central do Brasil's "mechanisms to stabilize the value."
Let's see. First there was the Cruzeiro antigo. This ballooned, prices for basic goods hit the tens of thousands, funny bills had to be printed, people lost their savings, nothing made sense anymore, and the currency was scrapped and replaced by the Cruzeiro novo.
In due course the Cruzeiro novo inflated, prices for basic goods hit the tens of thousands, funny bills had to be printed, people lost their savings, nothing made sense anymore, making room for the Cruzado. Memories of that.
Somewhere down the line, the Cruzado went back to being the Cruzeiro. Which, true to form, spiraled out of control, except it happened much faster this time, and many people had no savings left to lose. At any rate, in less than three years it was back to slashing zeroes all over again. Fresh memories of that.
Which brings us to the Real. When introduced in 1994, the BCB said it would defend near parity with the USD (remember?). It is at about $0.3 USD/BRL now. It is about 18% down vs. the dollar since the beginning of the month. Inflation has jumped to 7.7%. And very unfortunately, it does not look like any of that is about to get any better any time soon, regardless of the mechanisms deployed.
23.
Post 10813987 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.05h):
Since you bring it up, let's speak about the Real and the Ministry of Finance /Banco Central do Brasil's "mechanisms to stabilize the value."
/snip
Which brings us to the Real. When introduced in 1994, the BCB said it would defend near parity with the USD (remember?). It is at about $0.3 USD/BRL now. It is about 18% down vs. the dollar since the beginning of the month. Inflation has jumped to 7.7%. And very unfortunately, it does not look like any of that is about to get any better any time soon, regardless of the mechanisms deployed.
(You surely sound like a Brazilian, and an anti-Dilma one specifically. At very least, you must be from some Latin American country?)
A 70% loss of value in 20 years, and a predicted 8% inflation rate per year are nothing to boast about, sure. But they are still better than a 8% loss in 24 hours, or 78% loss in 14 months, both
totally unpredicted and unpredictable.
Several bitcoin companies have learned the hard way that bitcoin cannot be used as unit of accounting or as liquid capital storage, not so much because of its (past and possible) loss of value, but because of its unpredictability. (IIRC, SatoshiLabs, the makers of Trezor, were one such example.)
For contracts that span 2-3 months, an inflation rate of 1%/year can be ignored. An inflation of 10%/year cannot be ignored; but, if it is roughly predictable, it can be accounted for in the contract; either by adjusting the amounts to be paid, or pegging them to some mutually trusted inflation index. On the other hand, a sudden and unpredicted inflation of 10% over one week can turn a good profit into a significant loss, even if some payments are pegged to some index.
By the way, the BRL:USD exchange rate was 2.74 in 2005, 2.71 last December, and below 2.70 at all times between those dates. Not that bad, eh?
Finally, and, most importantly,
I am not advising anyone to invest in BRL, or dollars, or euros. No one with a bit of brain invests in a currency (except for very short term speculation, and even then it is a very risky gamble).
Since you seem to be in a reasonable mood today, let me reply. I'll try to be brief.
Characteristically, your reply changes the subject. You said that one of the top 6 problems with bitcoin is that it "lacks mechanisms to stabilize the value". I pointed out that the matter is frequently no better with sovereign currencies, which do have these mechanisms. I used the recent history of your country's currency as an example, because I suppose your pocket to have been hurt dearly as a result at least once. But really, the Brazilian economy's performance and Brazilian politics are besides the point.
The crucial claim is that central bank control of the money supply tends, over the long term, to be distortive, inefficient, and unfairly advantageous to the financial sector (have you read John Nash's arguments to this effect?). Bitcoin is revolutionary, among other things, in its subversion of that dogma, and in its bold and direct implementation of an alternative. Thus to say that bitcoin lacks mechanisms to stabilize the value completely misses the boat: the system eschews those mechanisms by design.
We seem, then, to have two options: you are not equipped to get the previous point, or you disingenuously ignore it. We must assume it is the latter. So you are an obfuscator, which disqualifies you from being some kind of trusted technical advisor to the public.
Finally, nobody denies that wide fluctuations is bitcoin's exchange rate impedes its proper functioning as a currency, for now. But what do you expect? The project is 6 years old, it is not as if something can go from not existing to mature stability overnight. And obviously we all realize the project may fail -- it is unnecessary to repeatedly point out something so painfully obvious -- but in that case it is near certain that something along its lines but even more robust will replace it. Either way we are witnessing an evolution of that most interesting of concepts (and assets), money itself. You must be as fascinated by this as the rest of us, otherwise you would not put in the kind of time you have put in in researching it. And yet you keep holding on to your predetermined conclusion (skepticism over the project's long term success), and looking for arguments to support that conclusion. This is, strictly speaking, irrational.
And I guess that is what gets me: your determined, persistent irrationality. It is rather uncomfortable to witness. Unless, of course, you are just an impersonator and a troll. In which case you deserve to be trolled.
24.
Post 10836489 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.05h):
Dear "Stolfi",
I have come across the page:
http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2014-02-17-HowToMakeSomeEasyMoney.htmlIt appears you formed the impression around February 2014 that bitcoin is a pyramid scheme. Since that date, however, you have thoroughly educated yourself on the technology, tacitly admitting that it constitutes an advance in CS and in economics. In any case, you no longer think being a pyramid is one of bitcoin's top six drawbacks.
Would you consider removing HowToMakeSomeEasyMoney.html? This would (i) keep you honest in your role as public tech advisor, (ii) remove some silly stuff from the web, (iii) prove that you are indeed Prof. Stolfi.
Removing the page evidently does not run contrary to your reasonable claim that currency speculation is a highly unorthodox and risky form of investment.
25.
Post 10841192 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.06h):
You should stop.
Can you imagine being this guys's colleague?
26.
Post 10845840 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.06h):
trolfi puts a lot of effort into it.
I'm throwing in the towel. He has far more time to waste than I do, and is off the wall. Back to ignore.
27.
Post 10886231 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.07h):
lambie, why are you stuck at 14?
28.
Post 10892000 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.07h):
Why do you keep killing your prophets, Bitcoiners? Why?
We don't kill them, we make them perpetual
noobs.
29.
Post 10898047 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.07h):
we are progressing towards ... NEW HORIZONS
30.
Post 10898884 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.07h):
By the way, I heard that someone invented an electronic cash protocol that, while still lacking some important features, is noteworthy because it allows instantaneous person-to-person transfers with no middlemen. Does anyone here know about it?
Yes, post an address, I'll send you some bits. It will take no time, and be just between you and me.
Altogether remarkable.
31.
Post 10899006 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.07h):
i suppose i am not really interested in deciphering emoticons.
32.
Post 10901443 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.07h):
i suppose i am not really interested in deciphering emoticons.
Too busy being supercilious?
I had to look that one up . . .
Where is NLC? We need him to brighten up this place.
33.
Post 10905109 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.07h):
Don't sulk.
Ya, this is boring. How about you tell us about love.
34.
Post 10987113 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.09h):
Oh dear, dear.
35.
Post 11228236 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.13h):
anyway, @trolfi seems to have left us for good.
no, I simply gave up the assumption you were a rational interlocutor, which makes discussion with you pointless.
in addition it is quite evident you use this and other fora to deploy obsessive and egocentric aspects of your personality, aiming to ensnare others in your head game. in fact, you satisfy at least 10 of the following 14 long-established troll criteria:
http://pluperfecter.blogspot.com/2011/08/14-characteristics-of-classic-internet.htmlconclusion: ignore.
36.
Post 11229839 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.13h):
How do you 'give up an assumption'? And 'interlocutor'?
I am certain Stolfi understood. If you didn't, I suggest you complete basic schooling.
37.
Post 11303792 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.14h):
i wonder if there is a plot twist here.... that JorgeStolfi is actually satoshi nakamoto
no.
38.
Post 11397996 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.15h):
interesting, for a change
39.
Post 11442903 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.15h):
Hello, Jorge.
Honest question: do you agree with the estimation that the more time lapses and bitcoin continues to develop and entrench itself, the less likely it is to outright fail?
40.
Post 11444030 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.15h):
Honest question: do you agree with the estimation that the more time lapses and bitcoin continues to develop and entrench itself, the less likely it is to outright fail?
Well, first, I doubt that it is actually "developing" and "entrenching itself". There are many companies that need it to survive, and several hundred millions available for marketing and PR efforts (like the St. Petersburg Bowl, fat discounts for bitcoin purchases, slots on Bloomberg, etc.). However, the few minimally reliable and meaningful data about adoption do not show that it is growing, and hint that it may be decreasing.
Second, the failure modes that I can imagine are not going to be detectable in advance. A killer bug may surface, a much better remote payment method may arise, the price may drop further (even if there will be another bubble or two before that) causing most of the miners to stop, there may be a successful majority miner attack, the US may ban it, etc. More likely, competition from other digital payment systems will cause the user base to shrink.
Bitcoin's economic structure is unsustainable because mining is being supported by new investors (to the tune of 800'000 USD/day) instead of its users; and there is no plausible roadmap to fix that situation that will not go through a price and network collapse. Moreover, the radical "free market" system that is supposed to define the transaction fees in that post-reward era, with unpredictable fees and no service guarantee, cannot possibly work. Because of the mirage of "deflationary currency", its price is 90% o more due to speculation, rather than use as currency. The huge and unpredictable price swings are a consequence of that. And so on.
Another possible outcome is a mining cartel taking over and becoming a de facto central authority, with power to change the protocol, set minimum fees, cancel transactions and seize funds, etc.. Believers have convinced themselves that such takeover is impossible because the "economic majority" has control. I have looked into those arguments and I believe thay are just wishful thinking. The only choice that the "economic majority" will have is to accept the cartel's takeover (and tell everybody that it is actually "good for bitcoin", hoping that the coin will not lose much value), or to lose everything. If that happens, perhaps bitcoin will continue to exist, and will continue to be used as a speculative intrument (as it is in China) and/or as a payment system. However, if it becomes centralized, it would have failed in its goal.
Interesting. Thank you for your answer.
41.
Post 11444249 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.15h):
<----
42.
Post 11447177 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.15h):
Fellow travelers,
This is a friendly reminder to change your account passwords, in case their hashes were compromised during the breach.
We wouldn't want usurpers spreading misinformation from hero accounts, would we?
43.
Post 11506311 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.16h):
Sounds like the FUD that only JorgeStolfi would write.
No, you've actually come across uncharacteristically, for lack of a better word, sane with regard to this block size stuff.
Should we be concerned for your well-being that something is terribly wrong?
No, it is just that I believe bitcoin is doomed either way, so it is easy for me to be neutral.
You believed that ex ante, and there is no amount of evidence that will make you change that belief. There is a word for that.
44.
Post 12783153 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.29h):
The importance of money flows from it being a link between the present and the future. JMK
45.
Post 12920435 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.32h):
if you were a whale you know what you would do
46.
Post 12938617 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.33h):
awww jorge, 'tis lovely when you actually make sense . . .
[snip]
I don't have enough knowledge of the field to look for bugs. However, the paper has been circulated for a month or so, at least, and was presented at the Monteral scaling conference. So, if there are bugs, they must not be very obvious.
On the other hand, it is hard to foresee all the bad things that could happen in systems that that include human elements. One example of a problem that was not quite foreseen when bitcoin was designed is the extreme concentration of bitcoin mining (with 54% of the hashrate now in the hands three Chinese pools). The protocol becoming the property of a single company was another. The fast price rise (that made the block reward be worth ~$8/tx) was yet another.
So, who knows what failure modes the "NG" blockchain coudl have.
Anyway, I see little chance that the proposal will be implemented in bitcoin. There is already too much software developed out there that assumes the current design. Implementing a change of that magnitude would be like swimming in molasses. Maybe some altcoin will adopt the idea.
47.
Post 13236526 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.37h):
go do it.
48.
Post 13566280 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.40h):
Below $375, I am a buyer. Come on, make it happen!
49.
Post 13567143 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.41h):
Still almost $26MM in leveraged longs on BFX. If this results in a margin call cascade, we could go under $200 again. Nobody can post dollar margin until Monday.
Bring it on! I had no ammo when it happened, exactly one year ago. You were busy chasing trolls that day (and talking about 4 Punch Raiders).
50.
Post 13567324 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.41h):
You mean you're not all in?!
I want MOAR. And to lower my DCA.
51.
Post 13567682 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.41h):
9 AM in Shanghai and price started picking up.
52.
Post 13585910 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.41h):
There is some poetic justice in the price tanking because of Mike's rage-quit and the block size war. There would have been no war and no rage-quit, if some segment of the community had not sided with Blockstream out of stupid greed -- because they imagined that Blockstream's plan would make the price of bitcoin go up, even though it meant giving up the very goal that motivated Satoshi to create it,and the only thing that justifies its existence.
NEWSFLASH: JS admits Bitcoin's existence is justified. Deep, informed discussion of strengths and weaknesses in the ecosystem proceeds unabated.
Fintech revolution is on.
P.S.
53.
Post 13692663 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.42h):
That's why wallet devs are eager to make their products compatible with the planned upgrade (presently undergoing testing).
Such confidence! Such inside knowledge!
54.
Post 13800407 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.43h):
I am genuinely looking forward to seeing what response you, brg444, icebreaker, hdbuck et al. provide for our entertainment if the network actually forks to classic and no disaster occurs. All that brazen supercilious venom spewed over the last year with potentially nothing to show for haha.
I'm glad you're finding it hilarious. I don't. Because I invested non-trivial portion of my portfolio into Bitcoin and I'd hate it all to go "poof!" if a hostile hard fork backfires and the net DOES split into two. Are you willing to bet ALL your BTC that this has a zero chance of happening? I would not be so sure.
yes, best to allow some private company with their own and their VC's agenda to take over bitcoin and dictate its development. surely that's what you signed up for.
55.
Post 13802376 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.43h):
I am genuinely looking forward to seeing what response you, brg444, icebreaker, hdbuck et al. provide for our entertainment if the network actually forks to classic and no disaster occurs. All that brazen supercilious venom spewed over the last year with potentially nothing to show for haha.
I'm glad you're finding it hilarious. I don't. Because I invested non-trivial portion of my portfolio into Bitcoin and I'd hate it all to go "poof!" if a hostile hard fork backfires and the net DOES split into two. Are you willing to bet ALL your BTC that this has a zero chance of happening? I would not be so sure.
yes, best to allow some private company with their own and their VC's agenda to take over bitcoin and dictate its development. surely that's what you signed up for.
Some corporation or other will always be there to try to bareback our little network. I'm calling it the Fidelity problem.
yep, but we are learning how to deal with it. it will be decisive. better now than later.
56.
Post 14136998 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.47h):
57.
Post 15791045 (copy this link) (by Trolfi) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.56h):
have you ever been chased by a green badger riding a lamb shooting bolts of lighting?
no.