I chat with Chris and Jimmy about bitcoin cash vs bitcoin, and we dissect the fight that is going on between the 2 camps.
Jimmy Song -- Bitcoin Developer, Educator and Entrepreneur
and Chris Pacia -- Lead Backend Developer at OpenBazaar
Thanks so much for chatting with me, and thanks to everyone on twitter and reddit who submitted questions for them!
If you liked this video, please subscribe!
HUGE thank you to all my AMAZING Patreon supporters!
And a GIANT thank you to my sponsors Nelly's Organics (https://nellysorganics.com/), Decentranet (https://decentranet.com/), and HardFork Entertainment (http://hardforkentertainment.io/)
Thanks for watching!! Leave a comment below and come say hi to me on:
Jimmy Song is dishonest calling Roger Ver a fraud. Song believes he is the only one who can decide what bitcoin is...he is anti-free speech by not allowing people to call bitcoin cash their real bitcoin.
BCH will take over BTC simply because lots more people can use it on-chain and the more transactions and people use it, the more acceptance and mind-share it will have to eventually flip. Old-time bitcoiners who used to make transactions have already switched to BCH. The Only thing holding BTC at this time is the financial exchanges...
There is no vis a vis IMHO.
Bitcoin is Bitcoin & btrash is rubbish, started by greed & fecal characters. I sold ALL of mine @ $2900us & that's all it was good for... 🌊riding the wake of killer whales 🐬
I think even if lighting fails, BTC won't lose its king status as crypto gold. There are better options for moving money like LTC and dgb..both being better than bch. I can see people holding BTC in the future as a store of value, but using ltc,dgb, or another coin to transfer money. I doubt there is much future for bch with people hating on it so much. I know people that don't know much about crypto in general but they call it Bitcoin trash..even if it's good tech a bad sentiment can destroy a coin.
Unbelievable Jimmy would suggest BCH a fraud, lol... He completely discredits himself, only it will take a few years for everyone to see that. I can't wait till the truth comes out of who Satoshi is. It's Dr Greg Write of course. Wonder if Jimmy would wager on that, I know I would?
So... Businesses doing they business are a bad thing? 40:05 I thought that this is how one fairly make money - by working. Doing business. How would you have "bitcoin economy" without businesses? Economy is all about business. How do you define the economy then? And is upgrading is good or bad? He says that small block size forced businesses to upgrade and that's a good thing but forcing to upgrade with hard fork is a bad thing.
Short term its OK for BCH to hold on too 'bitcoin' the term, but in a year or so it is time to give it up. Long term its Foolish and self destructive for BCH to continue this absurd quest to keep the name bitcoin, it's up to the whole BCH economy to name BCH not just its "religious core". Just because BCH fallows the real intent of bitcoin will not necessarily allow it to have that name bestowed on it if after BTC finally dies ---- which it definitely will if it doesn't somehow change course. Obviously I strongly prefer BCH's development course then BTC's SEGWIT and the pathetic disaster Lighting Network, which doesn't work and NEVER will. The average 3 year old in 20 years will only care about what chain is trustworthy, so without a doubt BTC has no choice but to change course and stay on-chain to survive long term. To me Bcash sounds better than any name in the entire crypto space. Using "Bcash" as an insult is slowly backfiring. 'Bcash' originally was a short, not insult. Ver's absurd emotional reaction is what built its popularity. That's good, it's how blockchain names itself. Economies are living emotions of the masses, as a totally non central item it should name itself. Right now, Bcash is the name uttered by most. Bcash will be the name of the bitcoincash hard fork for the foreseeable future. If BTC fails to go parallel (fabric or "sharding" like ETH) then its life span is only few more years, at which time Bcash may not want to be called the name of a dead coin?
Jimmy could not be more mistaken in regards to Roger Ver, Jihan Wu and Craig Wright.
There is 0 evidence that they are doing anything scammy besides his bias subjective opinions. Moreover, for anyone that has done any real research, there is no question that C.S.W is behind the moniker Satoshi Nakamoto.
Craig Wright has signed the genesis block unofficially with the private key in the presence of the most reputable figures in the world of Bitcoin (Gavin Andresen, John Matonis and other trusted parties).
The claim of Craig Wrights fraud during the official public key signing published by 'Motherboard' attributed to Greg Maxwell, a Bitcoin core developer, has been proven to be false. Greg Maxwell claimed that the two PGP keys could not have been created in 2008 as the functionality to create them was not available until july 2009, HOWEVER a document entitled "Appeal to authority: A failure of trust" reported to have been written by Satoshi Nakamoto explains the process of creating a PGP key using GnuPG version 1.4.7 (a release that was available in 2008). In short, the claims made by the motherboard article were wrong, and there is no real evidence to suggest C.S.W's original public key signing was fruadulent.
C.S.W has the private keys. That's proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he's been involved in Bitcoin since it's origin.
He had planned to go ahead and transfer coins from an address associated with Satoshi but backed
down before doing so sending an an email to Andrew O'hagan, the Journalist involved in the story around his public outing. It linked to an article
headlined “UK law enforcement sources hint at impending Craig Wright arrest”.
The article suggested that the father of Bitcoin might be liable, under the Terrorism Act, for the actions of people who used Bitcoin to buy weapons. (Similar thing happened to Ross Ulbricht who is serving 3 life sentences).
Under the link, Wright had written an explanation: “I walk from 1 billion [dollars] or I go to jail.
I never wanted to be out, but if I prove it, they destroy me and my family. I am the source of terrorist funds as Bitcoin creator or I am a fraud to the
world. At least a fraud is able to see his family. There is nothing I can do.”
Satoshi would be in Jail if he came out and definitively proved to the world he was Satoshi.
His mother claims that he was obsessed with Japanese culture growing up as a kid and had samurai swords. The non-public emails and posts of Satoshi found on forums make use of certain words that would only likely be used by a British/Australian/New Zealander.
Joseph Vaughn Perling famously told a story of meeting a hacker at a conference who went by the name Satoshi Nakamoto (Also referenced by Bernard von NotHaus in his interview for the film Bitcoin: The End of Money). After the CSW media debacle in 2015/2016, Joseph tweeted confirming it was in fact CSW who he'd met years before.
Craig Wright's technical understanding of Bitcoin is second to none and he certainly has the credentials to be Satoshi. If we simply stuck with the circumstantial evidence, which there is an abundance of i.e emails explaining to David Kleinman that he was working on a new form of Electronic Money he wanted David to be involved in, it would be 'probable' that he is Satoshi.
The unofficial evidence provided however, to avoid legal ramifications, makes it clear to anyone outside of the most skeptical and naive that he is in fact the Satoshi behind the Whitepaper. https://medium.com/@jonmatonis/how-i-met-satoshi-96e85727dc5a?
Jimmy is completely off point. If anything is experimental it's BTC. Adding Segwit, Lightning network and RBF completely changes the game theoretics of Bitcoin. Bitcoin Cash is following the roadmap laid out in the whitepaper. BCH's development is not centralized. There are many teams including Bitcoin ABC and Unlimited that compete, unlike the centralized development of Bitcoin Core with the Blockstream team which is hugely funded by the Rothschild. BCH Pls.
If you give someone free coins (BCH) they wont value them as much as BTC. People need to want to earn it and work for it. BCH will dump as soon as whales find out they have that shit. Also lets not forget, Bitcoin was never decentralised, satoshi owns 1M BTC and your telling me its decentralised, gtfo...
Big blocks can't scale. You need 2nd layer solutions on top. Or fork to a 1TB block size which makes running your own node too expensive for anyone except a large Corp. But that's ultimately what the Bcash crew wants. They wanna control Btc because they know true satoshi's vision. Cut the crap please guys.
Thank you Naomi for raising the level of discourse on this and not ignoring it despite the subject being touchy. Also handling Jimmy wasn't easy as he seems manipulative sometimes from my point of view but he was at least polite.
BCH will prove itself in the future so that it dissipates all the hate but that will take a lot of work to rebuild the ecosystem.
I have a question! If, when the hard fork happened, and Bitcoin Cash kept the Bitcoin name and Segwit had to take a new name, (like Bitcoin Segwit) would the market cap be switched? Making the big blocks blockchain the king and 1mb segwit blockchain the underdog instead of the Segwit chain on top and Big Blocks on bottom.
I think people still just don't understand any of this and people focus on the name too much rather than the protocols that the code runs. That's why there is so much animosity between the camps. Most people have still only ever heard of Bitcoin and this whole idea of different cryptocurrencies competing against each other is so new and radical to some who are winner takes all mentality. Diversity is a good thing and it should be encouraged, not shamed.
BCH has a ways to go.. Check out the last 6 or even 12 months of network Hashrate/difficulty between the two. BCH has yet to hit 1T and BTC is about to break 5T. I support competition but don't like the BCH marketing to confuse new people to crypto. Coinbase even got BCH and BTC mixed up with overstock website purchases. https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/difficulty-btc-bch.html#6m
BTC LN is really just a novelty. Overly complicated, payments fail, poorly incentivized, currently has the total capital capacity of the likes of titcoin ($150k USD). Showing that no one is using it. I don't see why anyone would want to use LN when there are other better options (DGB, BCH, DASH, or even DOGE). After setting up his node and getting his LN sticker my programmer brother just closed his LN BTC channel, not looking back. After years of waiting for LN to fix the scaling problem, he's now telling me BCH is a far better solution to scale.
Has anyone noticed how Roger Ver linguistically acts like Donald Trump?
What I mean is they both throw provocations and ill thought out comments that seem to be designed to just stir up things and grab attention. Ver also hides the fact he doesn't code and doesn't know how to build things by telling people to be "respectful" to him. That's a good way to hide incompetence.
And the ultimate similarity is how they brag about wealth as if that entitles them to a bigger voice.
Ver brags about being the first venture capitalist (he wasn't actually) in the bitcoin space but that investment was in Ripple. Which is nothing but a centralized banker coin designed to make life easier for only legacy banks and in no way is it an alternative global currency because it only challenges Swift's monopoly. What does that say? A guy who made a fortune out of decentralized tech, goes and invests in a proprietary tech, does not understand decentralized tech.
I was happy to road test both BCH and BTC with a Lightning node. After listening to Ver abuse Andreas Antonopolous for not "being a millionaire" that was the final invalidation for me.
A rich dude shaming a person who has contributed a thousand times more to the space than Ver, clearly is morally wrong. Bitcoin was built for everyone on this planet. Ego boosting by the few is nonsense and certainly not a part of "Satoshi's vision"
BTC will not be the people’s coin. I dunno if BCH will be either, but it seems certain bitcoin devs don’t care for it to become a vehicle to financial freedom for the avg Jane. For those of us that care about subverting the current cartel, it’s important to support more than bitcoin
Satoshi wasn't like the greatest coder.
He wasn't a very good engineer.
Just managed to bring a *few* things together that in the end was a radical innovation.
Jimmy - Without the radical innovation, would any crypto exist today and would we even be having this discussion?
Here's my take. Bitcoin is like Linux; no fork gets to be "The Bitcoin" (both forks are Bitcoin, broadly speaking). You can have Ubuntu, Fedora, etc. Or like Christianity where you can have Catholicism or Protestantism (and many others) and neither gets to be "The Christianity." The only reason people are getting tribal about it is because they are invested and each threatens the value of the other and making the wrong choice threatens the future of the whole ecosystem. So people are very passionate about what the "right" choice is, even though nobody knows what that is.
"bate and switch tactics" ... sounds familiar, kind of what happened with NY and HK agreement and SegWit2X ... bait and make people think you will do 2M blocks, then when you get SegWit in, switch and drop the 2X part of the agreement. Yup, sounds about right.
"Is the Bitcoin Cash the real Bitcoin" ... yes it is, last time I checked Bitcoin is a system with specific rules and working principles, which Bitcoin Cash has and BTC doesn't. Yup, if it works like one it has to be one.
"when you do a hard fork" ... that is how you upgrade the system/protocol. Jimmy tries to make a stance that logic doesn't follow as BTC hard forked few times before Bitcoin Cash fork, yet somehow to him that is still "Bitcoin" and Bitcoin Cash is not? This is what you get when someone is dishonest and tries to use propaganda to suit their narrative.
RBF was never part of Bitcoin, Core added it in without any consensus and not even asking anyone to get consensus. RBF and small blocks literally destroyed usability of Bitcoin in BTC, and this literally the only reason why Bitcoin Cash was created... Bitcoin Cash was created because usability of Bitcoin in BTC was sabotaged by Core, people that Jimmy Song is associated with and supports with propaganda.
Jimmy's "logic" is one that tries to sell you this idea that BTC is Bitcoin even though Bitcoin system is unusable now, BTC which actually changed into an Altcoin with SegWit, and he even advocates for NOT using BTC for transactions and how you should use Lightning network which works nothing like a Bitcoin... while at the same time tries to tell you that Bitcoin Cash which actually works exactly like original Bitcoin (before Core fucked it up with RBF, small blocks and SegWit) is not Bitcoin.
Just more evidence that Jimmy is full of shit, has flawed logic (it is not actually logic, it is just propaganda narrative and him and others like him, trying to pass this narrative as truth, hopping you won't notice that is complete bullshit.
Bitcoin Cash IS the real Bitcoin
if anyone is interested feel free to watch my videos on this topic also, and good place to more is reddit r/btc
"bait and make people think you will do 2M blocks, then when you get SegWit in, switch and drop the 2X part of the agreement." The community never agreed to do 2X, that was just an agreement between a few large miners and business people. They didn't get consensus behind the 2X fork so it was called off.
Picking moments in time when not many people are using it, is not a good measure of it being usable or not.
It is either usable ALL THE TIME or it is not usable... BTC being usable SOMETIMES (with low usage even at this baby adoption stage) is not something that can or will ever be mass adopted, for the very clear reason that masses cannot use it at the same time. For the whole world to make just 1 transaction, even if everyone would be using SegWit, you would have to wait around 10 YEARS just to get everyone do 1 transaction... and you call that USABLE? That is clearly a lie and my comment is 100% correct. its just ridiculous how dishonest you BTC shills are.
I am not telling any lies, if you want to claim I am lying, have some balls and integrity is explain it properly. Everything I wrote in my comment is actually truth and logic... proper logic, not the shit that people like Tone Vays and Jimmy Song talk when they say shit like, how they are defending Bitcoin, while at the same time advocating for not even using Bitcoin system and advocating for using a completely different system.
Tone Vays and Jimmy Song are liars, not me, Tone once said how blockchain without Bitcoin doesn't make any sense, yet he is a hypocrite to advocate for not using it and instead using Lightning network, which is not even a blockchain.
So again... what lies?
The hold outs were not just core devs, they were people who saw "reason"" and "logic" of the core devs. There was just a small handful of shithead businessmen saying "we are businesses" and there were exchanges that said fuck this 2x thing ... so such a lie.
Naomi said "I think forking was the whole point" - wtf. Maybe it is the point of open source but it is not the point of building something ubiquitous to take on banking. Banking needs a big strong opponent, right now divide and conquer works in their favour. $BCH is anti-research - it is only worth research value as a demonstration of stupidity leading to falling on your face.
I mean, is it reasonable to say that BCH is anti-research when BTC has put all of its eggs in one basket -- a basket which doesn't yet exist? If all transactions are supposed to take place on the lightning network, it would be wise to determine first whether or not LN can work as intended.
BCH is at least using a proven technology that has been working fine for 9 years. BTC is breaking a system that has been working great for 9 years in order to someday, hopefully, try something different... but LN still has some very serious unsolved problems.
So cool Naomi !! It’s such a shame there is so much bs from both sides and there really shouldn’t be ! I think it’s brilliant you have the intelligence and guts and the diplomacy to get things out in the open !! Great stuff bitcoin girl 😉👌👏!!
I'm no fool I see where BCH is going ..it's pretty clear. It reminds me of BTC when I first found out about it in 2011. And Jimmy is a idiot "BCH rolled back RBF" (replace by fee) was never a thing in the first place it was just added into BTC. I still have love for my BTC brothers even though we may not see eye to eye
Is it telling that I knew before the debate started that the douchey guy talking about jpop was for bitcoin core? I'm so sick of this bs wave of know-nothing groupies who dont understand that bitcoin as open source software was never intended to be owned or governed by one single authority. Bitcoin cash not only has every right to vye for the bitcoin name but it is actually just better technology and more deserving of it. The cognitive dissonance on the btc core side is out of control and Roger's shit personality and pr skills just exacerbate it ad infinitum. What a clusterfuck.
sushishifter this is why have been saying forever that Roger should just get out his own way and stfu. Bch is clearly better but 99% of people can't reach that conclusion on they're own and he just makes it worse by coming off as a total freak.
#Bcash has a "few Developers" that determine the direction of that chain: THAT SAYS IT ALL GUYS! That is way too centralized!
#Bitcoin's biggest contributor couldn't get his way: THIS IS DECENTRALIZED!!!!!
Russel that doesn't help that they intentionally drove up fees to drive people towards a "solution" that really can't compare to on chain transactions. It could happen again easily, now that people think Lightning is superior and you will eventually not even have to close the payment channels at all.
Satoshi did not want a restricting block size. He didn't think fees should be high. He didn't plan such a push away from the main chain just because there could also be payment channels. He didn't invent RBF or think changing the recipient address of unconfirmed transactions was ok. He didn't think 0-conf was unusable. And so on...
All of the opposite were important concepts in the Bitcoin design that we can have build on and improve rather than arbitrarily take out because we want to go against it and have every user run a node in the most resource inefficient way.
BTC transaction fees have been cheaper in respective sat/byte than BCH for a week now, and we are only going to get better! (the USD cost is cheaper in BCH, only because the BCH token price pails compared to BTC dominance)
The price of Bitcoin Diamond will explode to $59 next week because it is its tokens are used to trade on Game.com, the biggest virtual pet gaming in the world. I am proud to tell your guys, Pets home is released just now! Game on! The first event is totally free and huge GTC rewards! Half one million GTC rewards and another half in the candy box. Then the second event the pets trading system will open globally! Bitcoin Diamond is the only Bitcoin that fulfills Bitcoin whitepaper of mass adoption.
Hadn’t bitcoin raised the block size before? Why is jimmy saying we don’t know what will happen? And regular users need businesses to use bitcoin for it to be useful as a peer to peer cash system . What good is having peer to peer cash if you can’t spend it?
I've not watched all of this, but I hope the economic argument was brought up. When the blocks got full & tx times got slow it would have been easy & obvious to simply increase the block size in the interim to enable transactions to carry on as usage grew, not create a fee market and increase the cost of using BTC making goods and services more expansive and BTC less desirable. The only logical reason to do this would be to purposely make is less desirable. It doesn't benefit everyone for BTC to succeed. If the poorest countries in the world, those with the largest national debts started using BTC those who control the money supply would not be able to enforce & collect the debt. Coincidentally the BTC devs now conveniently say BTC is not for those who live on less than $2 per day. Absolutely outrageous when you think, as Brian Singer said, that it did have the potential to lift more of the world's population out of poverty more so than anything else we've seen!!!
Naomi Brockwell appeared on television discussing how ‘Bitcoin is saving Venezuela.’ As someone who ACTUALLY lives off Bitcoin in Venezuala, I can wholeheartedly state the obvious that localbitcoins vendors are only trading at amounts 10x greater then average monthly salaries with fees as much as monthly salaries, nor is Bitcoin sustainable for any goods and service exchange. Bitcoin Cash is much more suitable for a global network regardless of the name as are going about trying to achieve 1satoshi transactions. Referring to every other cryptocurrency besides Bitcoin as an ‘altcoin’ is like saying every other race then Caucasian is an ‘alt race.’ Who cares about a name? we need global peer to peer cash.
kudos for taking on the vs type video for bitcoincash and bitcoin,and for taking the time to acquaint yourself with the info of both sides at times you were more knowledgeable than jimmy on certain facts from the opposite side
everybody is so touchy wanting everybody in a certain box. we don't fit in boxes unfortunately
like roger he was in the bitcoin box for long until he felt it did not fit anymore, i am also out of the bitcoin box.
for those that prefer bitcoin box best to you if its comfy stay there,
no need to feel we need to censor you-tubers or reporters for educating
why am i out of the bitcoin box, cause banks and governments will only legalize bitcoin as legal tender if pressure is applied, we have to apply that pressure
5 billion users will tilt the scale
1mb block wont be able to handle it, nonworking/centralized LN defies what bitcoin stands for the revolution of peer2peer with no 3rd party for all even the poor
So it's possible you remember it wrong, which would make sense, or misrepresenting what was actually said, because of a misunderstanding.
Bitcoin development and features are done on the merits, not bullying and pressure.
I'd have to say Jimmy "wins" on rhetoric, but his points were largely confused and self-contradictory. A little disappointing to see few counter arguments from Chris, but perhaps he thought it would be better let Jimmy tie his own rope.
Namoi Brockwell You have a lot to sort through on the Blockstream topic... Sometimes I have to wonder if the greater conspiracy here is not spreading baseless accusations just to muddy the water and make the real issues with Blockstream and Core as it remains at this point seem lesser in comparison.
It's an interesting way of looking at it ;) I'm not trolling here, I think you are very positive for the community, we need more like you. Let's have more of these discussions and keep away from all the name calling stuff.
I thought it was important to bring up the usual arguments against bch in order to give Chris a chance to defend it. So in that respect you could say I didn't give BTC a fair representation, because I didn't allow Jimmy the chance to defend against the blockstream comments, but I have a lot of follow up material for the next video.
I don't think Chris sees himself as a representative of BCH. I would think it was the interviewers responsibility to provide balance - both sides of the argument. I was a bit confused as to whether Naomi's positioning was neutral or taking a side? I don't want to take away from the fact that I think Naomi's motives were positive and constructive.
it's not about putting Satoshi on a pedestal, it's about what we all invested in, what we believe already worked and will continue to work.. if you wanted something different, you should have forked under a new name.
What I do not like about bitcoin Cash is that they are trying to be claimed that they are the real BTC but everyone know that BITCOIN CASH is forked. I was very positive about bitcoin Cash when it forked but later I hated because Roger Vet has launched a war on Bitcoin and trying to highjack BTC by making confusion in the mind of investors. That's the only reason I hate it. There is no problem being rival or competitor but creating trouble for others existence is not a good move from BCH.
I love DGB as much I love BTC and they are faster than BTC. And there are many newly launched coins and they are far more superior than BTC in term of speed(transactions) and as well a field of applications. I love coins like ADA, EOS, NEO, QTUM and many more as much as I love BTC. So, we do not have to create any anonymity and enemy at each other and it will impact hard on both party.
There is one thing that causes the arguement between BTC and BCH and that is the name Bitcoin. I support BTC over BCH and would have no problem with BCH - There are many altcoins, some of which I invest in. The problem I see is Roger ver(&crew) constantly bashing BTC and trying to fool people into thinking BCH is BTC. I really don't see the need for this.... if BCH is so well done then the features should speak for themselves. Shouting about how bad BTC is instead of explaining why BCH is so good just seems suspicious to me. Finally a lot more people would invest in BCH if they didn't come across as so scammy. Roger is doing more harm than good to BCH.
Roger's argument for why he does that is because he has put so much energy into promoting the name bitcoin (which is true) and I think he really believes that bch is the real bitcoin. I think that's just sunk cost fallacy and they should use bitcoin cash imo
Jimmy does understand the nature of Bitcoin very well, no worries. That's why he has very strong args against Bitcoin Cash which Chris cannot address. It might seems like he gets those args for being a Bitcoin maximalist, but reality is Bitcoin Cash is digging its own grave because of the frauds it's connected to like Roger and Jihan.
Jimmy doesn't understand basic economics, let alone the Bitcoin code. Any "fraud" by Roger and Johin, pales about a million fold compared to the fraud committed by the Bilderberg world domination group, the chairman of which is also the Chairman/CEO of French insurance giant, AXA, who bought Blockstream, and Blockstream is Bitcoin core programmers.. and they have used that power to screw over Bitcoin.. remember when Bitcoin was used as currency? Remember when Expedia used to take Bitcoin to pay for hotels, rental cars and flights? And how they don't anymore... gee I wonder why. The point of using cryptocurrency is so that we can trade without being robbed by government gangs. It blows my mind how Peter Wuille and Jimmy Song can call this Bitcoin.. segwit is actually a hard fork disguised as a soft fork.. the only reason they kept this mess on the main Bitcoin blockchain is to steal the value of the existing chain; Peter Wuille, head of Blockstream direct quote 'the more centralized it is the better it will work' .. better for who? Bankers? Bitcoin Cash is the real Bitcoin. Non-segwit nodes can't validate Segwit nodes and are at the mercy of the segwit nodes; being a full node (non-segwit) and yet no being able to validate all transactions, isn't a soft fork. Roger Ver has libertarian, voluntaryist values, real values.. Bilderberg, on the other hand, just met this past weekend, tons of billionaires, media, military, NATO, etc... did you see it on the news at all? And yet you are worried about Roger Ver? Saying Roger Ver is committing frauds is like comparing apples to atomic bombs, the atomic bomb, being Bilderberg. Bilderberg created the EU 45 years ago... the EU is now trying to outlaw memes this week. And you are saying Roger Ver is the fraud. Jimmy Song is either a complete idiot or being paid as a paid troll... maybe part of the $55 million that Blockstream got from AXA. Wake up.
They are fully addressed in other places, so I'm not gonna say I wasn't disappointed to see Chris not argue them. Might be a matter of strategy, but in any case disappointing. I'd recommend searching for some debunk articles on the issues brought up.
The miners are interested in finding a nonce which will create a hash with certain characteristics. Lastly, they have to find a random value that they included in the header, which makes the computed hash over that header a value below a particular target. In other words, they do not have to agree to change the protocol. Though there are a few gold diggers attempting to fill their pockets and certain projects that aren`t viable and shouldn`t be encouraged in any way. For users running a complete node, it is a fairly painless procedure to upgrade the software to the newest version. The process of locating a new block to extend the blockchain is known as mining. Proof-of-Work systems utilize cryptographic hashing algorithms to create the action of mining a block a complicated computation. Our software is totally incompatible with altcoins. Changes and modifications to how that it works need to be approved by consensus and every CPU gets a vote. To start with, it`s essential to realize that hardware wallet users control entirely their private keys. Whether you`re bullish or bearish on Bitcoin Gold, you ought not lose your coins as a result of careless mistakes! On the 1 hand, it may result in making a coin that solves all the pending issues. There`s no currency or digital asset named Bitcoin Core. Bitcoin Cash increases the range of transactions that may be processed per block. You could send any quantity of money, any place in the Earth, almost at no cost. You`ve made some great money already on the market, but you want more. For a wealthy individual, BTC`s price premium may be viewed as a plus. For someone without lots of money, BCH`s low price may look like a great deal for Bitcoin. If you have some concerns about the worth of Bitcoin after all forks, you need to be ready for a drop. The distinction is that not all of these suffer the chain split. The primary problem is Bitcoin imposes a hard limit on the magnitude of a block, the location where transaction information becomes stored. The end result is many straightforward wallets, called SPV wallets and very commonly found on your phone, will be quite confused about which chain is Bitcoin. In Bitcoin, the most important reason is known as the network effect.