Token Daily

2

3

2

1 2

4 2

lubokkanev 4 days ago

Here are some points why this graphic is highly misleading:

It's listing Bitcoin Core (BTCC) and Bitcon Clashic as "major" forks, while they are totally not.
It gives credibility to Bitcoin Gold and Diamond, when they are not used almost anywhere.
It disputes BTC has been hard forked, which it totally has been.
It lists Bitcoin Dark as a fork, which is not.
It displays different minority BTC clients as forks, which they are not.
It mistakes the name of Bitcoin Cash by adding ABC.

Here's my take on the diagram. Smaller items are less influential.

6

Giusis 3 days ago

You're criticize what you call an "inaccurate diagram", but on yours, your are renaming the Bitcoin to "Bitcoin SegWit"? You must be the n.1 RV student in the "let's rename the coins" school. Thanks for the laugh. :)

0

Dugg 3 days ago

2016 bitcoin client still syncs the main chain, which is all before these forks. so you can't say that BTC moved away, it is THE chain.

0

libertarian0x0 3 days ago

>It gives credibility to Bitcoin Gold and Diamond, when they are not used almost anywhere. To be fair, I think Bitcoin Gold and Diamond are major forks just because the market cap they reached. I agree with you that, by any criteria, BTCC and Clashic can be considered major forks.

1

chainxor 4 days ago

Fairly accurate. Only missing is the correct naming of the prevailing Bitcoin Cash fork - which _IS_ Bitcoin Cash (BCH), not Bitcoin Cash ABC.

1

lubokkanev 4 days ago

It's also quite misleading. It's listing Bitcoin Core and Bitcon Clashic as "major" forks, while they are totally not. It gives credibility to Bitcoin Gold and Diamond, when they are not used almost anywhere. It disputes BTC has been hard forked, which it totally has been. It lists Bitcoin Dark as a fork, which is not. It displays different minority BTC clients as forks, which they are not.

4

Giusis 4 days ago

I agree, "Bitcoin Cash ABC" (as coin name) should be renamed to simply: "Bitcoin Cash" in the final row.

1

chernobyl169 4 days ago

Oh, more disinformation.

Literally nobody took "bitcoin clashic" seriously except the 3 people that used it to discredit Bitcoin Cash. Yet here it is in this obvious hit piece.

12

Giusis 4 days ago

Do you mean that a fork shouldn't be mentioned in a exhaustive list of forks because you (or any other here) doesn't take it "seriously"? And what's the reason exactly? Because you don't like the logo.. the name.. or what?

0

lubokkanev 4 days ago

> shouldn't be mentioned in a **exhaustive** list of forks But this is not an exhaustive list. It's the "major bitcoin forks" list, which Bitcoin Clashic obviously isn't.

5

Giusis 4 days ago

If you think there's missing forks, you should ask the author to add them, nor the opposite: asking him to remove them making the list less accurate.

0

lubokkanev 4 days ago

> asking him to remove them making the list less accurate Again, this is not supposed to be an exhaustive list, but a list of the major forks. I think that's pretty easy to understand.

2

Giusis 4 days ago

And you determine what's the "major forks"? Bitcoin Gold and Bitcoin Diamond and Bitcoin Core aren't "major forks"... because you don't "like" (for whatever reason) them? Or because they aren't widely accepted? So they should remove Bitcoin SV as well? You would love to have only the BCH listed? That's your point? :)

1

lubokkanev 4 days ago

They are not widely accepted, they are not widely used for transactions, they don't have much of a reason to exist (based also on market cap). They are not major, by any definition of the word. > So they should remove Bitcoin SV as well? I'd say BSV is way more major than any forks, besides BTC and BCH, although less used, traded, marketed than both. > You would love to have only the BCH listed? BTC - the propaganda fork, and BCH the original Bitcoin are most important. BSV is well funded, that's it. Everything else is noise. Yet, [here's](https://i.imgur.com/VlNsW1j.png) how I drew it.

3

Giusis 3 days ago

> They are not widely accepted, they are not widely used for transactions, they don't have much of a reason to exist (based also on market cap). They are not major, by any definition of the word. You know why you BCH supporters are fun? Because you use certain argumentation to support your thesis without realizing that these argumentation can be applied the same way when comparing the BCH to the Bitcoin. :) The BCH has less than 3% than the Bitcoin market cap, less than 3% of the Bitcoin hash rate, 3% of the Bitcoin price, 4% of daily volumes. To use **your** same words: **these numbers are not major, by any definition of the word. The BCH don't have much of a reason to exist.** (and so the BSV). > BCH the original Bitcoin It's so "original" that you called it: Bitcoin Cash, chose the ticker BCH, and (...see all the numbers above). As I said, you guys here are so fun. :)

0

chernobyl169 4 days ago

This article is deliberately placing bullshit forks in its "exhaustive list" on the same level as Bitcoin. > Because you don't like the logo.. the name.. or what? Oh, piss off with your straw man. Logos aren't even in the article. NOBODY took "bitcoin clashic" seriously. NOBODY took "bitcoin diamond" seriously. Yet this article tries to say that Bitcoin ABC is a *coin* (it's not, it's a client) and that it's an "exhaustive list" - but doesn't even get the name of Bitcoin Cash correct. It's disinformation and you're supporting it.

7

imnotevengonna 4 days ago

> Yet this article tries to say that Bitcoin ABC is a coin (it's not, it's a client) I'm pretty sure that it is acceptable behavior in this subreddit After all, this is the sub that refers to Bitcoin Core as a *coin* while it is one of many Bitcoin *clients* In fact, it is the client written by Satoshi himself Feels weird when someone else does it, eh ?

0

chernobyl169 4 days ago

> OP posts a biased article > I point out bias > "BUT ITS ONLY FAIR" facepalm.png

5

imnotevengonna 4 days ago

The article refers to forks of Bitcoin, and we have lots of them. I don't disagree, I am merely pointing out YOUR bias. This behavior is evident almost in every post in here, I don't think you disagree with that. You personally called Bitcoin "Bitcoin Core" This is the only place on the Internet where Bitcoin is called by another name, and an altcoin is called Bitcoin. You repeatedly call Bitcoin with the name of its reference client. The article shows where the ABC client forked away from Bitcoin to create a new incompatible blockchain and then shows where SV forked off the BCH chain to form its incompatible blockchain. You accuse the article as "biased". If that is true, then is it not exactly what this sub does continuously ? Then you surely agree that this sub is also "biased" So, please be so kind and explain to me how *your* biased behavior is different than what you are describing here as unacceptable. is it not EXACTLY what this sub does repeatedly ?

0

chernobyl169 4 days ago

Yah, I'm not gonna give in to your whataboutism. "They do it too" is not a justification nor an excuse. If BTC didn't need to rely on misinformation to prop up the perception of utility and value, there would be no dispute. My comments are about *this article* and nothing more. Your reply doesn't defend the article at all - it doesn't even *mention* it beyond the fact that you note my commentary about it - and therefore is not a discussion on topic, but an attack on the subreddit. All your points deflect back on to the behavior of others while not justifying the article or the author. I politely decline your offer of a troll war. You can go back to your price memes and payment channel networks now. > So, please be so kind and explain to me how your biased behavior is different than what you are describing here as unacceptable. No. You're a smart human, you can observe my biased behavior and plainly see how it is different than what I am describing here as unacceptable (a word I didn't use, but do agree with).

4

imnotevengonna 4 days ago

>Yah, I'm not gonna give in to your whataboutism I'm sorry you feel that way, but you are engaging in bad faith. This is not "whataboutism", I neither said "they do it too" > If BTC didn't need to Your bias is showing yet again, noone spoke about Bitcoin. We are commenting on an artiocle in regards to major Bitcoin forks, not Bitcoin, get over it. >Your reply doesn't defend the article at all I know, I am not trying to defend it, why should I do that. I replied to YOUR comment and pointed out the hypocrisy of it, nothing more, nothing else. Your mental gymnastics are fun though. > an attack on the subreddit this is at least funny. Pointing out accepted behavior is not an attack, it is merely a comment. Do yo need a safe space? I hear r/bitcoincash is safe for people with limited cognitive abilities Your inability to rationally defend your position is evident of the biased behavior I am pointing at. You do not get to rewrite history, nor redefine what is and what is not the acceptable norm in software engineering and naming conventions You obviously do not like that article, this is palpable. At the same time, you cannot rationally defend your position, you want to call Bitcoin by its reference client, but you do not reserve the same courtesy to Bitcoin forks. If it is unacceptable for your favorite altcoin, it should be unacceptable all over the board. The article clearly mentions that the Bitcoin Cash chain was created by the Bitcoin ABC client, which is accurate information. It might hurt you because you are emotionally invested, but it is not wrong. By avoiding to acknowledge your irrational and wrongful behavior you end up accepting it. The behavior you object to IS what you and many in this sub engage, period. Have a nice day

0

chernobyl169 4 days ago

I am an American. I am immune to projection because it is the #1 technique used by the current leadership. Your entire post is projection, and your reaction to being called out on it is, predictably, more projection. All the faults and flaws of BTC's history, all of the mismanagement and terrible leadership that brought us to the fractured, forked, and in-fighting crypto community, all of the propaganda and censorship - it all reflects here in your tone and in your post. By nitpicking over details and deliberately not acknowledging facts, you accomplish what you set out to do: derail my point. Congratulations! You derailed my point. You did not, however, dispute it; in fact, you reinforced it.

2

imnotevengonna 4 days ago

>Muricah lol ok, you should lay off sniffing glue buddy, you cant handle it properly and you are making a fool of yourself, and you are obviously ok with that, but you are giving a bad name to americans in general, and believe me, with the orange-in-chief, you should be trying to look better to others, not worse. i find interesting the mentality of certain cave dwellers in this sub. You are a fine specimen of that variety. This is merely a discussion in regards to an article about Bitcoin forks. You are not the center of the world buddy, you are not special... In fact, the world hardly acknowledges your presence. Get over it. If you start behaving correctly and acknowledge your mistakes, life gets easier to live by

0

image_linker_bot 4 days ago

[facepalm.png](http://i.imgur.com/FwsRdVg.png) --- ^(*Feedback welcome at /r/image_linker_bot* | )[^(Disable)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=image_linker_bot&subject=Ignore%20request&message=ignore%20me)^( with "ignore me" via reply or PM)

2

Giusis 4 days ago

All the forks are listed by the date of the fork and then they are mentioned at the end at the same level, how do you call them "bullshit forks"? You don't like them and so they shouldn't be listed? And why the Bitcoin Diamond or Gold or whatever shouldn't be listed, why "hiding" them in a complete list of forks? If you have noticed any other missing fork, tell the author and him to add those ones. Bitcoin ABC is the software implementation not a coin. However it's fun that you mentioned that while the owner of this sub is intentionally changing the name of the Bitcoin to "Bitcoin Core", that is a completely different coin. I support the facts that can be verified by anyone, if you spot errors in that scheme, post the errors instead of suggest to remove the forks because you don't like em. Talking about disinformation, try to open the RV wallet and check how the Bitcoin is named. :)

0

chernobyl169 4 days ago

Oh here we GO! Mr. "defend the misinformation" just dumped a wall of text! > All the forks are mentioned at the end at the same level But not all the forks mentioned still exist today, so that's disinformation. > how do you call them "bullshit forks" Are they traded today? No? Then they're bullshit. > why "hiding" them in a complete list of forks Because this is disinformation. That's how you do disinformation; you include irrelevant bullshit to "hide" it in. > owner of this sub is intentionally changing the name of the Bitcoin to "Bitcoin Core" Last I checked he doesn't have the power to do that. Doesn't matter, that has nothing to do with this article, and is more distraction. > Talking about disinformation, try to open the RV wallet and check how the Bitcoin is named. :) Oh, that's odd because when I try to use the BTC node wallet, it's called #BITCOIN CORE Your fu is weak. Please go back to your troll dojo and get proper training.

4

Giusis 4 days ago

> But not all the forks mentioned still exist today, so that's disinformation. It looks like you are confused by the terminology: a fork isn't a coin, a fork is an event that will create a new branch. Its existence isn't prolonged, hence it cannot cease. It's the new coin formed (or not) because of the fork that will continue to exist (or not). Of the several forks happened during the past years, at the end of that scheme you can see only 6 coins listed plus a generic "dozen of forked coins". And here's the question for you: what's the coin (and not the fork) that is no more and where's the "disinformation"? > Are they traded today? No? Then they're bullshit. Sure they are, how do you think their price fluctuate? > Because this is disinformation. That's how you do disinformation; you include irrelevant bullshit to "hide" it in. There's no disinformation. I explained it already in the first point. > Last I checked he doesn't have the power to do that. Doesn't matter, that has nothing to do with this article, and is more distraction. I shown you what's the real "disinformation". > Oh, that's odd because when I try to use the BTC node wallet, it's called > BITCOIN CORE > Your fu is weak. Please go back to your troll dojo and get proper training. You are again confusing a software implementation (nodes) with the actual crypto-currency names (user wallets). In example: the BCH nodes are called "Bitcoin ABC", while the coin name is "Bitcoin Cash". I'm surprised that you're engaged in a discussion about the crypto-currencies without knowing the basics.

0

chernobyl169 4 days ago

> I'm surprised that you're engaged in a discussion about the crypto-currencies without knowing the basics. LOL. Please. You're convincing precisely nobody with your bollocks. Go on, tell me how I'm stupid some more. That's *sure* to convince me. At least I have the decency to know that you're incorrigible in your opinion, and I have no delusion of ever swaying your opinion. It's a shame you can't recognize that I have facts on my side and do likewise; but such is the nature of debate: when you have facts, you argue facts; when you have logic, you argue logic; when you have neither, you argue the person. BTC's reference wallet is called Bitcoin Core. BCH has no reference wallet, but the most popular one is called Bitcoin ABC. This article does *not* treat those two coin histories equally. Therefore, it is biased. End of argument. *post script* It is sad that Bitcoin, the original Bitcoin, has to rely on biased reporting to prop up its "originality" narrative. You'd think it would be built-in, but BTC has strayed so far from its original design that these techniques must be used to preserve the narrative - and it is upon this narrative that the entire perception of BTC's value is built. What a fragile house of cards Bitcoin lives in.

5

Giusis 4 days ago

> LOL. Please. You're convincing precisely nobody with your bollocks. Go on, tell me how I'm stupid some more. That's sure to convince me. I'm not trying to "convince" you, I asked you to get educated: not from my words, from the information publicly accessible. > BTC's reference wallet is called Bitcoin Core. You making again the same mistake: you're confusing the software implementation with the coin name, that is "Bitcoin" not "Bitcoin Core" (Bitcoin Core, referring to the coin name, is another crypto-currency). A this point it's not that you don't know, it's more about that you don't want to know. > BCH has no reference wallet, but the most popular one is called Bitcoin ABC. Correct, and how this makes anything different? It still a software implementation, not a coin name. > This article does not treat those two coin histories equally. Therefore, it is biased. End of argument. It's listed the History of every coin and when they forked, how it is "biased". Care to explain your pov, or you can only moan about the fact that isn't accurate, without explaining why? > post script It is sad that Bitcoin, the original Bitcoin, has to rely on biased reporting to prop up its "originality" narrative. You'd think it would be built-in, but BTC has strayed so far from its original design that these techniques must be used to preserve the narrative - and it is upon this narrative that the entire perception of BTC's value is built. What a fragile house of cards Bitcoin lives in. Now you are entering in the narrative and your pov, there's enough of these posts in this sub. In this thread we're discussing about the accuracy of that scheme. Don't start again with "we're the real Bitcoin" bullshit, I will not follow in this idiocy.

0

chernobyl169 4 days ago

I suppose you're going to tell me that I'm Roger Ver next, right? You'd only be the 9999th person ever. Whatever helps you sleep at night. You can lead a mind to an idea, but you cannot force it to think critically. Continue to suppose to know what I think based on the comments of others, and continue to be wrong. I will not entertain it. I will simply sit back and continue to laugh about the most egregiously obvious transgressions.

2

Giusis 4 days ago

Be prepare do be massively down-voted because the chart makes clear what's the Bitcoin and what's the several forked coins and this won't help the scam tactic (in example by using the wrong names) used by certain individuals here to confuse the newbies trying to push em into buying something that isn't the Bitcoin.

0

2

5 2

grizzly_intel 3 months ago

This is pretty cool, thanks.

2

AutoModerator 3 months ago

Hey /u/koavf! Thank you for your submission!

Unfortunately it has been removed because your submission must be a direct link to an image. Please feel free to re-submit using a direct image link (must end in jpg, gif, png, etc). Blogs, social media, and similar types of websites will not be approved, as per Rule 4.

Also, if your link ends in ?1 please remove that and anything else extraneous before submitting.

Also, we just started working on a whitelist for legitimate, reputable news sites related to the arts world. If your post links to such a website, please send us a modmail so that we can add it to the whitelist. Again, no blogs.

Thanks for understanding! <3

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

Jimmy_bags 3 months ago

Yeah, They literally are printing money. Weird how pest control says they are the only people selling new art, but theres never any for sale then all of a sudden a bunch of new prints signed and number pop up in select galleries. Banksy isnt a person it's an organization trying to revive the dead. They even paid owners to "grafitti" on their wall there was no actual crime committed. The only real reason banksy is anonymous is bc they split up the responsibilities and have trouble selecting just one "banksy". Pest control also operates the official banksy website

1

Jimmy_bags 3 months ago

You do know pest control IS banksy right? They also take pictures of the documents saved on a server in case of natural disaster or robbery. I always wondered myself when people pay all this money for just a print that is signed.. it's not special at all it's the same quality and print as a fake your only paying for the number/signature which is kind of shitty, Might as well sign a piece of blank paper and I'll just hang it up on my wall

3

reprage 3 months ago

I kind of want just an authentication certificate, without the print.

2

scairborn 3 months ago

Welcome to world of high end art aka money laundering aka my shit don’t stink aka “but is the artist dead” aka money laundering.

2

dijon360 3 months ago

Genius.

6

2

3

25 2

Theguy10000 41 mins ago

Iran can use it to deal with it’s allies such as Syria - Iraq and maybe even Russia and China

1

onetimeonly1zwo3 Low Crypto Activity 2 hs ago

Real world adoption baby.

1

DarthCoinMaster 2 hs ago

History repeat over and over: when some country/leader want to create something backed by gold, it get killed or submised to US Army....
Ceausescu wanted to get out from debt and create a local currency backed by huge reserves of gold... get killed. Puppet gov put in place.
Saddam wanted the same... get killed and we all know the mess later...
Ghadafi wanted a united commercial Africa using a currency backed by gold... get killed. And another mess come after.
Now Iran wanted the same... guess what will happen?

The only way to fight this shit mess of fiat&banksterS GAME IS TO USE ONLY BITCOIN!

3

thesmokecameout 21 mins ago

> Ceausescu wanted to get out from debt and create a local currency backed by huge reserves of gold... get killed. LOL, yeah, he was totally killed by the banksters, not justifiably executed by all the people whose lives he'd stomped on for decades. Best revisionism evaaaaah!

1

vexcoin redditor for 4 weeks 36 mins ago

Iran's best move - and worst move - would be to fully adopt Bitcoin as a national currency. It would be the best move because no one in their country would use other currency internally after some time and they'd be a crypto-powerhouse in the financial world in the near future. An entire population existing on sound digital currency supported by a worldwide infrastructure. It would be the worst move because they would be invaded as soon as central banks could come up with some scheme to 'convince' everyone to invade Iran. Iran's leadership would lose everything including their lives and a new government would be installed. In the end if the people adopted crypto fast enough, there would be no way to tax these people, no way to capitalize on the invasion, especially if the regime told their people that they are giving up fiat power and restoring it to the people, and that they should never trust a central bank again. When the invasion is 'done' and the new central bank is installed... no one uses it even when threatened by death. It's a long shot either way. I feel some government will make the call at some point and get out of the power-grab game once and for all.

1

thesmokecameout 20 mins ago

Doubtful that they have enough mined to make a go of it. The government can't just say "ok, everybody use Bitcoin!" if nobody owns any yet.

1

poshpotdllr Vulgar, Malicious, but Disgustingly Delicious Majo 2 hs ago

with the power invested in this doodool i shall crush israel

1

1107461063 redditor for 3 months 2 hs ago

Just use btc ffs. No one wants that fucking shitcoin.

1

1107461063 redditor for 3 months 2 hs ago

Just use btc ffs. No one wants that fucking shitcoin.

1

Cygnus_X 3 hs ago

Spoiler alert. Iran won't actually back it with gold

2

thesmokecameout 17 mins ago

Same as Madirtbag with the "Petro".

1

WippleDippleDoo 4 hs ago

Governments will never meaningfully build on independent p2p cryptocurrency.

1

mountaintribesman 6 hs ago

They are shipping US troops to Saudi Arabia right now

1

blk0 7 hs ago

Isn't there any "gold-based stablecoin" out there yet?

2

thesmokecameout 18 mins ago

How can there be? Who has enough gold to issue one, and who would be dumb enough to trust that they wouldn't get Corzined? Do you not even remember what that dirtball did to MF Global? Or how his Democratic Party buddies protected him and told the people he'd fucked to just get over it?

1

jaumenuez 4 hs ago

What do you need gold for? I doesn't add anything good to Bitcoin, just more risk, fractional scams and not more stability.

2

Orangemaniscool redditor for 3 months 2 hs ago

Have you seen how shiny it is though!? /s

2

1107461063 redditor for 3 months 2 hs ago

You have to attach that horse back to the cart somehow

1

1107461063 redditor for 3 months 2 hs ago

You have to attach that horse back to the cart somehow

3

laustcozz 8 hs ago

...regime change incoming.

1

ftrader 8 hs ago

By finding out what their requirements to their national cryptocurrency are, and outlining how some token scheme on BCH would solve their problem?

My guess is it would need some sort of federated sidechain where they can do the things that governments usually want to do.

It's better to let the citizens who want real permissionless money to buy and use Bitcoin (Cash) and the governments do their permissioned blockchain things.

In this case RBI already have a name and the project seems planned out. So first step is to let this new national crypto go to fail. Only then might they reconsider.

1

laninsterJr 9 hs ago

I wonder even Iran's friends would trust it.

1

NYCBred212 9 hs ago

?

1

bitsteiner 9 hs ago

Proof of Supreme Leader.

3

1107461063 redditor for 3 months 2 hs ago

😂 I died.

1

b_f_ 10 hs ago

By using colored coins and informing them of technicalities involved. They should sponsor their own miners and dev teams to have a say. Also, a clear 5-20 year roadmap would be required, clearly stating what feats are being locked in and specify backwards compatibility for each such change.

1

ccmrt Redditor for less than 60 days 10 hs ago

Nothing like being so thirsty for anybody to actually use BCH that you’re going after an authoritarian regime to adopt it

0

mtrycz 10 hs ago

Reality check: The only way a state actor would issue a token on a chain, is if it was the majority chain for its algorithm.

We have a long way to go.

3

Sugarbird676 11 hs ago

Honestly, I don’t get why sanctioned countries like Iran don’t throw their support behind an existing, public blockchain. It would already have an existing ecosystem, wallets, etc. Also, more difficult to block, censor, or shut down.

But then, their own central bank would have to cede power..

6

WippleDippleDoo 4 hs ago

Because they want to cling to power.

1

kaaveh_babaee 8 hs ago

I think if the country like iran use existing cryptocurrency like btc or... actually they are worthless national currency by their own hands.

2

mtrycz 10 hs ago

Volatility.

2

b_f_ 10 hs ago

Using colored coins volatility becomes a non-issue.

2

igobyplane_com 11 hs ago

this relies on others trusting them, which of course they don't, the best iran could do is probably have strong fiscal discipline with their own monetary policy with gold restraining it.

as far as gold, it's been part of the monetary system for 1000s of years. crypto never really has, is volatile and uncertain, massively speculated in, and doesn't offer any real benefit over gold for a government.

1

c-1000 11 hs ago

oh no bb what is u doin?

And soo close to the election cycle, too.

1

patriceac Yesterday

Yet another shitcoin. Wondering why they're not simply going with Bitcoin rather than trying to reinvent the wheel.

9

veganic11 redditor for 7 weeks 6 hs ago

Control. All centers of power want control to expand their power. I'm not talking about Iran specifically but all governments, corporations or any organization with centralized power and decision making.

2

Nick123758 11 hs ago

Volatility I guess

5

spunky-vengence redditor for 7 weeks 9 hs ago

Unfortunately gold's volatility is not that much lower. The only backing that makes sense would really be to their national currency.

0

NiceGuyInDaCut Yesterday

You can ban be from here if you want but fuck all Jew and fuck all globalists!

0

gt- 4 hs ago

Not all Jews are bad, mainly the ones in power

2

survivornaginata 6 hs ago

by globlaist you mean anglosoxn which stole entire continents are aere prime killers and soldeiers of global capitalism in world today.

0

rsincognito redditor for 3 months Yesterday

Aaannndddd that’s why they are going into wipe them out, just like Qaddafi

3

HashLee 6 hs ago

Lol get the hell out of here with your paid propaganda b.s. America is the biggest power hungry debt inducing terrorist in the world. Just look at all the b.s they spread about Bitcoin Is this article even credible? Also what does a gold based crypto have anything to do with the crap you wrote?

1

veganic11 redditor for 7 weeks 6 hs ago

And Saddam. The fascist empire war machine won't allow it.

2

eqleriq Yesterday

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-07-08/asteroid-16-psyche-and-all-that-gold-won-t-make-earth-richer

sounds like a great idea

0

2

2 4

12 3

CONTROLurKEYS 4 hs ago

Why is this written like a raging petulant child. I couldn't take it seriously

0

Bitcoin_to_da_Moon redditor for 3 months 6 hs ago

If wasabi was so bad, it would not have received the reward. :)

4

btsfav 8 hs ago

this sounds like a competition whose privacy attempt is less worse.

correct me if I'm wrong, but if you want to break the chain you have to convert to say monero and back to bitcoin in chunks. I wonder if this is even more expensive than mixing in the end

1

zackflavored 8 hs ago

Lols this picture of cw always cracks me up

2

TheTrillionthApe 9 hs ago

samurai ==cunts I thought they were so cool when I entered the space.but it's been way past 3 strikes. sketchbags.

1

rinko001 Yesterday

Samourai is deanoynmized by design.

1

alphamiau Yesterday

So what's the verdict, Wasabi good or no?

2

TheGreatMuffin 6 hs ago

It's very good but you need to learn what coin control is and how to use it, in order to not undo the mixing effect after the mix. https://medium.com/@nopara73/coin-control-is-must-learn-if-you-care-about-your-privacy-in-bitcoin-33b9a5f224a2

9

buttonstraddle Yesterday

Samourai has been doing shady stuff for a while now

4

sergeant-shaftoe redditor for 4 weeks 9 hs ago

example?

6

buttonstraddle 20 mins ago

When top BTC developers like gmaxwell and nicolas dorier expose Samourai's weak privacy, they ended up getting attacked by the Samourai developer. The Samourai dev also creates fake twitter and reddit accounts into order to bash competitor wallets. I'm sure there's more I can't be bothered searching [https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/bhz37b/samouraileaks\_samouraidevs\_sockpuppet\_exposed/?sort=top](https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/bhz37b/samouraileaks_samouraidevs_sockpuppet_exposed/?sort=top) [https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/af3xfk/is\_samourai\_wallet\_maybe\_not\_honest\_enough/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/af3xfk/is_samourai_wallet_maybe_not_honest_enough/) [https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/bie0z7/warning\_do\_not\_use\_the\_sentinel\_wallet\_watcher/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/bie0z7/warning_do_not_use_the_sentinel_wallet_watcher/)

1

gizram84 11 hs ago

How is this shady? They are pointing out a optimization strategy.

1

bitusher Yesterday

Did samourai bring up these concerns to you in private first or just start promoting itself on twitter without your knowledge?

Its great that there are different privacy wallets ... but i would prefer more Coopetition than competition. If samourai did not bring these concerns up to you privately or on github and went straight to twitter , this is indeed bad form

4

buttonstraddle Yesterday

Just search this sub about Samourai and you'll find all you need to know about them.

0

theowaway01 redditor for 3 months Yesterday

Thanks for this clarification.

3

wasabiworried redditor for 0 days Yesterday

Clarification? All he said was "fuck you". That topic would be worth a long podcast with some people who put years of thought into coinjoin theory. Until that happens, i don't trust either wasabi or samurai at all. Just because it is dezentralized and nice in theory, does not mean people should trust any random developer.

0

ieee802 Yesterday

My understanding is the main issue is the change from the mix - which everyone already knew shouldn’t be considered anonymous anyway. Clearly a marketing stunt from Samourai.

9

wasabiworried redditor for 0 days Yesterday

When mixing 10 BTC, it would be ok if there was only some initial change in the first transaction that breaks up the 10 BTC. I could handle that as a toxic output. Unfortunately, wasabi creates up to dozens of new change while remixing, like breadcrumps chainanalysis can follow. When i pointed this out, my post got deleted at the wasabiwallet subreddit. And saying "fuck you" to others who point it out does not really reassure me that the wasabi devs know what they are doing. I have no interest in attacking them personally, but watching an interview with them, they said "i don't understand the question" more than anything else. Wasabi might be nice in theory, but recommending it to newbies is really dangerous IMHO. The last mix of each 0.1 BTC chunk might have the 1/100 anonymity set, but since we are talking about 100x 0.1 BTC if you mix 10 BTC, all those change output wasabi creates whenever it has to refit the amount to the current mixing amount, i would absolutely not be surprised if it can be deanonymized with near 100% certainity. Maybe the wasabi devs can reply to this concern in detail, instead of deleting posts and writing "fuck you" to others? If we should not touch ANY wasabi change at all, this is a really stupid way to bloat the bitcoin blockchain. And even then, with 100's of 0.1 BTC in a wallet, people will create so many patterns that chainanalysis can pick up. I would love to have a decentralized mixer working, but wasabi does not seem to be something i can trust.

0

bitusher Yesterday

Brand new account and that username . Why not simply use your real reddit account? >i would absolutely not be surprised if it can be deanonymized with near 100% certainity. have you made an attempt? >If we should not touch ANY wasabi change at all, Why can't the change accumulate and be mixed later ? >with 100's of 0.1 BTC in a wallet, people will create so many patterns that chainanalysis can pick up. They have a hint that the person used wasabi, yes, but many people use wasabi. If exchanges want to start blocking everyone that has 0.1BTC balances they can be my guest and they will soon find out they will lose most of their clients in time

12

gonzobon Yesterday

Thanks for the write up /u/nopara73

10

2

25 4

Tokeyzebear 3 days ago

You realize most of the shitcoins today are hard forks of eth right?

2

BatmaxPT 3 days ago

imo the most import was to clear the blockchain in the next big tech to get into independent if a b or c, dev are working hard and that is what will make the difference in the future

2

Realchacal 3 days ago

Why does this remind me of China??

1

natehenderson 3 days ago

They're not threatened by Bitcoin...

1

kallebo1337 3 days ago

they also mentioned Ethereum. They said literally bitcoin and then there is shitcoin

i feel ethereum got enough acknowledge in congress

0

Henrythe1st 3 days ago

The first step is to get mass adoption of bitcoin then the alts will follow. Patience alt bagholders.

0

SpacePirateM 3 days ago

Joe Lubin should have been there.

1

Cryptoliv 3 days ago

In fact! hahahaha Vitalik should go in front of them. He should just try to think a bit slower and speak slower once he'll be there, otherwise, it will be complicated

1

onedeadnazi 3 days ago

psh who cares. ya gotta appreciate the humor here.

1

Hodlon2 3 days ago

Anything that is not a Bitcoin is a shitcoin. But yeah ETH is ok I guess.

1

wavegrowth 3 days ago

Ethereum is indeed a software experiment. The important part, is buying the proper hardware, to install a full Ethereum node. This is the heart of the security model. This is a decentralized software system; Nothing else matter. Once done, we can focus on the next step, removing any 'single point of failure'. Having a king is a massive 'single point of failure'. Decentralization must be proven, and can't be imposed from top to bottom. If people only buy ETH at an exchange, and never try the software. They are just expecting an increase in price, on the next buzzword pump. This thing will go nowhere. At the end, this was just another dead shitcoin!

1

rogerflow 3 days ago

Ethereum is a pure software experiment, the price doesn't matter. Bitcoin is a 'hard money' experiment, a different story.

0

Safervan 3 days ago

Bitcoin. All that matters.

4

omaramassa 3 days ago

A win for bitcoin is a win for all crypto. Someone call Vitalik next time tho

0

jandetlefsen 3 days ago

Kind of missing the point. Bitcoin is what you say when you talk to noobs because there's a chance they've heard it before. No need to explain another thing in a hearing they probably already confused af about. This is about regulatory context, what applies to Bitcoin will also apply to Ethereum. This is not a beauty contest about which project is better. Well maybe it is for Libra about why we shouldn't burn it to the ground. This is not about publicity, very few people watch it that are not already involved in the space. Bitcoin has paved the way for all of the space and they rightly deserve the publicity and price development etc. Ethereum will have to convince though the endless application and flexibility build on top of it of which i have zero doubt a lot will succeed. Value will come through that type of usage, not by being paraded in front by itself.

8

wmonster 3 days ago

As far as I remember, Ethereum was 'software decentralization'; And from the beginning Bitcoin was 'hard money' decentralization.  You can't expect the use cases of Bitcoin to apply on Ethereum. Ethereum is a different beast. Money is a winner take all game; Software decentralization is not. Bitcoin will compete with FIAT and Gold; Ethereum will not.

6

Savage_X 3 days ago

Its ok - the powers that be are shitting bricks over the thought of a currency outside of their control. Its probably better if they don't understand that we are also building full fledged financial services in the same way.

3

AMart1901 3 days ago

Most these people in congress are absolutely clueless or have an insanely rudimentary understanding of crypto and Bitcoin in general. You can't get them to base two without them crossing base 1. This is just the beginning so no sense in adding even more layers of complexity to the space especially while Bitcoin is still king.

5

stoneIPA12 3 days ago

I really wanted a bitcoin edit after her last statement thanking everyone for their time and any questions.

2

BeerBellyFatAss 3 days ago

[Ahhh, sooooo satisfying. Lol](https://vimeo.com/348961146)

3

BeerBellyFatAss 3 days ago

*Bitcoin

1

stoneIPA12 3 days ago

Yes dude yesssss

2

Chr0no5x 3 days ago

No desmoke next to her? Heh.

6

diogovk 3 days ago

Isn't it better if any government just leaves Ethereum be?

I thought the whole point was not worrying about what government has to say about it.

13

nootropicat 3 days ago

You're right. At some point someone high enough is going to look at DeFi and (hopefully) a widely used zk-snark (or stark) shielded pool for anonymity and throw an enormous fit. DeFi + anonymity is worse than Brad Sherman's worst nightmare about bitcoin

6

CA_TD_Investor 3 days ago

Why would she go in front of congress and bring up the largest enabling of scams and fraud since the invention of the internet itself?

Seems like a bad idea.

0

Karma9000 3 days ago

Yea, that internet sure has been a terrible scourge on humanity.

3

afksports 3 days ago

Meltem holds both ETH and ETC as well as some others. https://www.meltemdemirors.com/disclosure

Definitely a conscious decision to only mention bitcoin. probably aimed at not confusing congress further on the subject.

41

hitmybidbitch 2 days ago

yup. excellent job all around.

1

BeerBellyFatAss 3 days ago

Agree. Too many cryptos would spoil the message. But combining all into a singular asset class of cryptocurrencies would be best. Bitcoin only is misleading.

14

wmonster 2 days ago

The 'Bitcoin' cryptocurrency class, is the only one where the monetary policy is definitive, and can't be changed by anyone. Roger Ver, and Bitmain, tried to undermine the properties and failed. This leads to antifragile, genuinely decentralized, or full 'tustlessness' properties.  Bitcoin is a protocol. People care. A lot of people run their full node, and nobody can't add random/stupid commit to the code. Now, the Bitcoin's native reverse-polish language gives its full potential with 'Lightning', as a second layer.  Ethereum on the other hand; Nobody run their full node. Nobody cares about the software code. People have their funds on the exchanges, and fear to run anything by themselves . Ethereum is fragile, Ethereum is a company, and is nowhere to become a protocol. Ethereum is older now, and everything is still the same. Ethereum people must look at Bitcoin. They are definitively missing something.

4

BeerBellyFatAss 2 days ago

LN is a failure full stop

4

wmonster 2 days ago

LN operates flawlessly; And we have today 3 implementations. This is the only breakthrough in this space for the last 3 years.  On the economic side, the Gresham's law is the reason why LN will never be used extensively, in the years to come. But LN is here, and ready, for the future.

4

kinoshitajona 3 days ago

ETH and Bitconneeeeeeeeect? nah, keep them separate.

1

Red5point1 3 days ago

Lumping all cryptocurrencies as a single asset would be a great and disastrous mistake. It would be like saying all investment assets to be all treated the same, land, heirlooms, priceless object/art, precious metals, antiques... all the same. Cryptocurrencies have many different usages and applications. Each one needs to be treated individually. Pushing for governments to treat all cryptos the same way as BTC is an injustice to other cryptos that are aiming to accomplish more than just be a digital number with a $value.

4

UpstairsAdagio 3 days ago

She calls anythin not bitcoin a shit coin. Make no mistake she is not looking out for you

14

wavegrowth 3 days ago

For a lot of people who are in this field for years. Only one thing matter: 'hard money'. Everything that can't be 'hard money' is useless and worthless. And only Bitcoin is 'hard money' and will be 'hard money' in this field. The book 'The Bitcoin Standard' explains the whole story. Sh\*tcoin in a sense, is a pejorative way to quickly explain the same story again and again.  But here we are. We all know that Ethereum is 'software decentralization'. Ethereum never had as objective to compete with Bitcoin, and can't compete with Bitcoin on the 'hard money' side anyway. To be useful Ethereum has just to prove that software decentralization, and software anti-censorship is not a vaporware. To be realistic this objective is not yet fully achieved. But Ethereum is still there and the future will tell.

2

BeerBellyFatAss 3 days ago

She owns some ethereum and other coins that aren't bitcoin. But I get what you are saying. She very much is about self publicizing and positioning herself as an "expert" or rather a go-to media figure. She will position herself wherever the media focuses on. Shitcoins in the past, Bitcoins today, Ethereum tomorrow. I also understand the value of connections and I don't think it is in our best interest to ostracize her. Not that you are doing that btw.

13

UpstairsAdagio 3 days ago

Yeah I wouldn’t ostracise her but at the same time I just don’t like giving people like this attention.

7

Anthony-AltcoinXP 3 days ago

Where's the guys over at Coin Center during this? This is exactly what their job is.

https://coincenter.org/

4

grandma_corrector 3 days ago

Meltem has the chops. And she bakes /r/Tezos which is awesome.

4

liberated_u 3 days ago

"Bi'coin" "Bi'coin" "Bi'coin"

I don't know why, but dropping the "T" in Bitcoin sounds annoying.

5

iamalex_ 3 days ago

That's how us 'Murican talk

3

sebdd1983 3 days ago

The shirt of the guy in the background is about to explode

23

HARDETH 3 days ago

When he does, all BTC will come rushing out of him.

3

electroze 3 days ago

Bitcoin sucks- too volatile and too slow. It's absolutely worthless.

0

whiteknives 3 days ago

Hm... last I checked it was worth about $10k.

3

electroze 3 days ago

Nope, that's only temporarily what someone else is willing to pay. People are also willing to pay for lottery tickets and pyramid schemes.

6

ThredHead 3 days ago

Hahaha nice response.

0

BeerBellyFatAss 3 days ago

Bitcoin the religion is thriving. The tech,,,not so much.

8

4 2

twigwam Lover 30 mins ago

https://insidebitcoins.com/news/new-blockchain-project-diana-hopes-to-tokenize-ownership-of-the-moon/233375

1

Toyake Platinum | QC: CC 201 Yesterday

Thos scam has been around for decades. From buying part of the moon to naming stars, nobody outside of the seller recognizes your purchase.

2

Red5point1 Gold | QC: CC 120, DOGE 15, r/Technology 7 Yesterday

Just like any physical ownership one can claim it however unless that ownership is recognized by majority of people concerned then the claim is just a claim.
Historically land ownership was claimed and usually backed and/or enforced by military force.
So, if the company claiming moon property don't have agreement with all interested groups on Earth then they better have military capability to back up their claim, because you can bet that other groups who get interested in those lands they will go there with military power either private or back by a government.
I'd like to think humans will all come to a peaceful agreement that all humans will work together when going onto off-world ventures, however the reality is that that is slim chance happening.

3

no_microagressions_ Bronze Yesterday

Thanks for the reply, I think I will hold back from this one

1

Redmoons Bronze Yesterday

>This one Kek

2

Ripple12345 Bronze | QC: XRP 37 Yesterday

Dude.

3

Dronevids Bronze Yesterday

Yeah he's gonna miss out on his bitcoin moon base.

5

grislybear Bronze 10 hs ago

Why would anybody wanna buy a piece of the moon? You’re better off just drafting up your own “lunar deed”. It would give you the same legal claim as these companies... absolutely none.

5

Dronevids Bronze 2 hs ago

No grislybear moon base for you.

1

grislybear Bronze 1 h ago

It’s cool I got a salmon river hibernation tree stump

1

czy87553 Bronze Yesterday

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterrestrial_real_estate

TL;DR:

Extraterrestrial real estate refers to claims of land ownership on other planets or natural satellites or parts of space by certain organizations, individuals, and scam artists. Such claims are not recognized by any authority, and have no legal standing. Nevertheless, some private individuals and organizations have claimed ownership of celestial bodies, such as the Moon, and are actively involved in "selling" parts of them through certificates of ownership termed "Lunar deeds", "Martian deeds" or similar.

5

no_microagressions_ Bronze Yesterday

Thanks, that clarifies

1

2

12 2

----Mike--- Redditor for 2 months. 2 months ago

They may have been referring to the p2p cash version, Bitcoin Cash BCH.

1

momo3HC 2 months ago

Yes it could but that’s a long and hard way.

1

MemoryDealers 2 months ago

Obviously this would be Bitcoin Cash

1

sy5error 2 months ago

possible. you never know in crypto land

1

kaitje 2 months ago

Or Monero, if you don’t like your cash to be traceable.

2

linux_n00by 2 months ago

bank does not like untraceable :)

1

kaitje 2 months ago

The idea of crypto is to replace the bank.

1

Wyvern1980 1 - 2 years account age. 200 - 1000 comment karma. 2 months ago

One thing to consider is that physical money is incredibly efficient as a transmitter of value, and does not rely on an internet connection or other advanced technology for a transfer to occur. Cash aside from BitCoin will probably always exist.

2

sonny1022 Gold | QC: CC 69, ADA 45 2 months ago

I think I just saved 15% by switching geico

1

andersrh 2 months ago

BTC no. BCH yes

0

SILENTSAM69 Crypto God | QC: BCH 222, CC 15 2 months ago

Bitcoin Cash maybe.

0

Toriun 2 months ago

Replace not cash need, but electronic money

1

mr_li_jr 2 months ago

Jesus, a story based on a Reddit anecdote. That's embarrassing.

21

jcoinner 2 months ago

The quest for the almighty "click". Blah.

1

d_goddard Free State Project - Liberty in our Lifetime! 2 months ago

Because the entire country does fewer than 7 tx/sec

9

Toyake Platinum | QC: CC 201 2 months ago

In its current form? Not a chance.

19

Trident1000 2 months ago

Lighting network major upgrades coming: https://bitcoinist.com/these-13-bitcoin-lightning-network-upgrades-will-solve-its-biggest-hurdles/

0

Toyake Platinum | QC: CC 201 2 months ago

Ln is a meme, it’s not scalable which is why it’s always 18 months out and needs regular “ln is just around the corner!!” Articles.

0

ProgrammaticallyHip 2 months ago

> always 18 months out Claims LN is a meme by using a tired ass meme.

0

Toyake Platinum | QC: CC 201 2 months ago

Sorry, is LN out of development yet?

1

Trident1000 2 months ago

Is literally any crypto project out of development?

2

Toyake Platinum | QC: CC 201 2 months ago

Not that I’m aware of. Does that give LN a free pass for being years behind schedule with no end insight?

0

Trident1000 2 months ago

Lol you’re such a troll on this sub. You sound like a toddler throwing a temper tantrum. Why don’t you give a stab at developing a global scalable decentralized payment network and let us know how it goes.

1

Toyake Platinum | QC: CC 201 2 months ago

Solid deflection. Keep waiting on LN, I’m sure it’s right around the corner!

0

Trident1000 2 months ago

Actually its already here, just still under development like literally any software product even outside crypto.

2

Trident1000 2 months ago

k

0

Friggish 1 - 2 years account age. 200 - 1000 comment karma. 2 months ago

Did you read the article? He said 20-30 years down the line. Plenty of time for improvement until then.

3

chasethechaser 2 months ago

You'd wanna see big improvements in Proof of Work in that time for it to be the global reserve.

1

Wyvern1980 1 - 2 years account age. 200 - 1000 comment karma. 2 months ago

Boy, even 20-30 years seems awfully fast. It took the eurozone that long to implement the euro, and that transition should ostensibly be politically much easier to implement.

1

Toyake Platinum | QC: CC 201 2 months ago

Sure did. My point still stands true. I’m not saying it can’t change, I’m saying I has to.

0

btcwerks redditor for 3 months 2 months ago

So a guy posted something on reddit and a site wrote an article about a random poster supposedly hearing this?

Fuck me this space is full of complete idiots.

23

roubel redditor for 3 months 2 months ago

I agree with you! And as I remember reading that- the guy said that this could happen in like 20-30 years..

2

10 6 5

LovelyDay Yesterday

When LeRoux's biographer basically says there is zero chance that he was Satoshi, then I think it's pretty much case closed.

Solotshi =/= Satoshi

3

gotamd Yesterday

I find the Le Roux theory pretty intriguing, but I don't think I'll ever be convinced that anyone is Satoshi until they prove so cryptographically.

2

LovelyDay 7 hs ago

The convenient part of this new myth is that the guy is already firmly in US custody and would likely never get that chance. Compare to CSW who has all the opportunity but fails to provide a single public proof. Solotshi has the advantage in terms of plausible deniability.

1

gotamd 7 hs ago

I agree that there is a tremendously higher likelihood of Le Roux being Satoshi than CSW. I don't have a better theory about Satoshi's identity than JPL, either. It is certainly an interesting idea and too bad we'll probably never know the answer.

1

PenisShapedSilencer 5 days ago

Maybe bitcoin is just some NSA-created honeypot to attract criminals.

The irony!

3

ClockworkAeroplane 4 days ago

Just like Tor.

2

derektrader7 5 days ago

Dont waste your time reading this. The writer lists no actual evidence to connect Paul Le Roux to Satoshi. He keeps referencing research and evidence but never stated any of it directly. Another pointless shock piece by a person only peripherally involved in ₿.

1

definitelymyrealname 5 days ago

I find the idea that Satoshi is an autodidact to be extraordinarily unlikely. I'd be absolutely shocked if he wasn't a graduate student or professor at the time of the white paper. He's likely living a quiet life in academia somewhere and wondering at what his ideas turned into.

2

sj3l9q1mnb05s53c2g8x 5 days ago

TLDR: most likely no.

9

nxthompson_tny 5 days ago

LOL, true. Though more likely than lots of other candidates.

0

snoopty 5 days ago

NGL this feels repulsive to read.

2

cryptohoney 6 days ago

Not sure, why don't we ask Craig?

2

Manticlops 6 days ago

No.

2

nxthompson_tny 6 days ago

Submission statement: Evan Ratliff, who wrote a book on Paul Le Roux, the criminal mastermind, has a piece digging into the question of whether Le Roux is actually Satoshi Nakomoto. It's a story about that question, but also about the author's personal journey: as he convinces himself the answer has to be yes, and then no, and then maybe.

6

2

Stay up to date on all things crypto and blockchain

Select

Also, we just started working on a whitelist for legitimate, reputable news sites related to the arts world. If your post links to such a website, please send us a modmail so that we can add it to the whitelist. Again, no blogs.

© 2018 Token Daily

Stay up to date on all things crypto and blockchain

Select

Also, we just started working on a whitelist for legitimate, reputable news sites related to the arts world. If your post links to such a website, please send us a modmail so that we can add it to the whitelist. Again, no blogs.

© 2018 Token Daily

🙌 Login to Token Daily