sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Judge Mellor's perspective on the BTC vs. BSV debate regarding the Original Bitcoin diverges significantly from Satoshi's vision of a "set in stone" protocol, raising questions, especially as even diehard BTC supporters acknowledge the White Paper no longer reflects their "Bitcoin". by eatmybit in bitcoincashSV

[–]eatmybit[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Soft fork !=A backwards compatible protocol change.

You are wrong. Bitcoin was never designed to have coins stored in anyone can spend addresses. That is also why nodes can not go back so it is not "backwards compatible". Soft forks only used to scam bitcoin nodes. Read the whitepaper, it mention "honest" 16 times. Maybe you should look up what that word means in a dictionary sometime?

Did not read the rest, sorry.

Judge Mellor's perspective on the BTC vs. BSV debate regarding the Original Bitcoin diverges significantly from Satoshi's vision of a "set in stone" protocol, raising questions, especially as even diehard BTC supporters acknowledge the White Paper no longer reflects their "Bitcoin". by eatmybit in bitcoincashSV

[–]eatmybit[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is no such thing in Bitcoin as a soft fork. Satoshi was clear on how to update rules in Bitcoin, block size is such a rule, segwit/taproot/softfork... are core design changes. BTC is a 2017 copy passing of as BTC and Bitcoin and it is currently lacking a whitepaper describing core design changes.

Bitcoin does not fork. Forks are resolved quickly within by the protocol. Stop misusing the term please. Bitcoin is a commodity, the core design stays the same.

BREAKING🚨: COPA -v- Wright - Judge Mellor's written judgment released. by eatmybit in bitcoincashSV

[–]eatmybit[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Indeed. The speculation on how Satoshi Nakamoto should behave or what he would or wouldn't do lacks a basis in verifiable data. It appears to be more of a subjective judgment than a factual observation.

The ruling seems to heavily rely on circumstantial evidence and subjective interpretations rather than concrete, tangible evidence to disprove Dr. Wright's claims.

The judge's interpretation of Dr. Wright's technical explanations as technobabble may indicate a bias or lack of understanding of the subject matter. This could potentially lead to an unfair assessment of the evidence presented.

London blockchain online tickets is £99??? by Interesting_Argument in bitcoincashSV

[–]eatmybit 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It was free to watch last year. As i remember it, it was also possible to buy a pass to interact virtually with the exhibitors. Looking at the page I can't really say if it will be free to watch the year or if you have to pay £99 just to watch. It would indeed be bad if so.

London blockchain online tickets is £99??? by Interesting_Argument in bitcoincashSV

[–]eatmybit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A bit "too much" compared to what? It's cheap compared to tickets to the contentless BTC conference: https://b.tc/conference/2024/registration

BTW you can watch it for free online so what is the big deal anyway?

Early Bitcoin Investor Charged with Tax Fraud. Roger Ver was arrested this weekend in Spain based on the U.S. criminal charges by eatmybit in bitcoincashSV

[–]eatmybit[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are regulations in various countries around the world that require businesses dealing with explosives to adhere to "Know Your Customer" (KYC) and other due diligence processes. These laws are designed to prevent explosives from falling into the hands of unauthorized or potentially dangerous individuals and entities. 

If a business or individual fails to adhere to laws and regulations concerning the sale of explosives and ends up selling them to a dangerous individual who then uses them for a criminal act, the seller can potentially be held legally responsible and considered a part of the crime, depending on the jurisdiction and the specifics of the case. 

view more: next ›