Yep, it was already corrupted. Do your research people. If something is popular with normies, that should be a red flag.... Think about it, research it.
No. Classic example of someone who's been following Bitcoin since 2013. I've seen it all. The same shit that happened with GamerGate or this election or now WallStreetBets happened with the BTC "scaling debate." Media disinfo, coordinated coopting in the background, censorship of public debate, social media astroturfing, and now institutional pump and dump and manipulation through things like Tether. BTC and its network is now simply a blockchain version of the same banking system that we already had. That's why it can now be acceptable. Did you think the Fed and the largest moneyed interests in the world were simply going to let actual financial revolutions happen without resisting? No. Their primary attack has been coopting of BTC.
I went in 2011 and reviewed the code. It's not like legacy banking. In fact no version of Bitcoin has any similarity with legacy banking. You also seems to have missed that BCH (2017) forked to BSV (2019). Core (BTC) is the original chain.
No disrespect for BCH, BSV or any other fork, I get their reasoning behind bigger blocks. Because that what it's all about, the scaling. Back in 2009 smart phones with 16 - 32GB storage + centralized cloud storage wasn't a thnig. Most people has desktop PC's and hard drives with 500GB or even 1TB, which would double in size every second year according to moores law.
This means, is it wasn't or smartphones, tablets, ssd drives and centralized cloud storage, the average Joe would probably have 32TB - 64TB hard drives in their PC's today. Hence big enough to hold the entire BCH or BSV blockchain.
But since that's not the case we gotta have the 1MB block size limit, and solve the scaling on layer two, preferably in a decentralized way. At least for Bitcoin. I do like Moneros dynamic block size too, Ethereums sharding, and Nano's local chains, those solutions are all brilliant and much better ways of scaling.
So in conclusion, there's a lot of fake news in the media, from governments and from the banks. And the whole Bitcoin + all the forks is just confusing for everyone who doesn't know about crypto, so stop being a bitch about it, it only makes you look bad.
My advice: don't buy Bitcoin, buy Ethereum, Monero, Nano and some other coins who's tech and properties you like instead.
The original Bitcoin would have set up a completely independent financial system with a peer-to-peer, near instant and near free (think 00.00001 fees on any transaction) payments that gave people complete and decentralized control over their finances. Then, as a hedge against certain forms of early attack, a temporary block size limit was put into place, with the full understanding of everyone from Satoshi on down that it was to be removed immediately once the system could handle the worrisome attack.
What happened next was interests from outside pounced on the system's primary vulnerability: the social control of the codebase. Through ousting of original Bitcoin insiders like Gavin Andresen and the installation of clearly incompetent or controlled figures through Blockstream, the temporary limit was, through tons of infighting, censorship, and disinfo campaigns coordinated through social media (twitter, reddit) and official internet channels (bitcointalk forums), ensconced as a permanent feature. This was sold at the time through clearly bunk argumentation that it's not worth going into right now.
The salient result of this block size limit is that block space is now artificially limited. Artificially restricted. This causes the average fee to skyrocket, and even worse, bakes in the potential for enormous explosions in fee price as happened in Dec 2017 -- any time the network becomes too heavily used, its fee and the wait time increase exponentially.
Now, other than clearly destroying what was to be a peer-to-peer cash system, why is this important?
Well, again the outside-invested companies like Blockstream develop "second layer" solutions that allow people to use their tokens in transactions that will then only much later, and through Blockstream and friends, be settled on the BTC chain itself. But of course these second layer networks are privately and centrally controlled. They share none of the properties of the base Bitcoin layer that made it revolutionary, free, and valuable. Once this setup is accepted, BTC has become completely co-opted and under the control of status quo financial interests, since they will control the hubs and the centers of power over the network.
During all of those people quite aware of the bullshit created spaces for uncensored talk, like /r/btc (rather than the sewer that is /r/bitcoin), and originalist Bitcoiners forked away and formed Bitcoin Cash. It is now the only reasonable fork of Bitcoin worth calling Bitcoin. BTC is not Bitcoin any longer, though through the disinfo and capture of exchanges and the like they kept the brand and ticker name. But it's a shambling corpse with the face of Bitcoin sewn on....
Yep, it was already corrupted. Do your research people. If something is popular with normies, that should be a red flag.... Think about it, research it.
Dorsey has been pumping it for a few years. He transfers a lot of his liquid assets into it.
Yup, he banned actual Bitcoin (BCH) from twitter because he knows BTC is already in control of institutional interests, including his own.
No, you give us the evidence
classic example of FUD
No. Classic example of someone who's been following Bitcoin since 2013. I've seen it all. The same shit that happened with GamerGate or this election or now WallStreetBets happened with the BTC "scaling debate." Media disinfo, coordinated coopting in the background, censorship of public debate, social media astroturfing, and now institutional pump and dump and manipulation through things like Tether. BTC and its network is now simply a blockchain version of the same banking system that we already had. That's why it can now be acceptable. Did you think the Fed and the largest moneyed interests in the world were simply going to let actual financial revolutions happen without resisting? No. Their primary attack has been coopting of BTC.
I went in 2011 and reviewed the code. It's not like legacy banking. In fact no version of Bitcoin has any similarity with legacy banking. You also seems to have missed that BCH (2017) forked to BSV (2019). Core (BTC) is the original chain.
No disrespect for BCH, BSV or any other fork, I get their reasoning behind bigger blocks. Because that what it's all about, the scaling. Back in 2009 smart phones with 16 - 32GB storage + centralized cloud storage wasn't a thnig. Most people has desktop PC's and hard drives with 500GB or even 1TB, which would double in size every second year according to moores law.
This means, is it wasn't or smartphones, tablets, ssd drives and centralized cloud storage, the average Joe would probably have 32TB - 64TB hard drives in their PC's today. Hence big enough to hold the entire BCH or BSV blockchain.
But since that's not the case we gotta have the 1MB block size limit, and solve the scaling on layer two, preferably in a decentralized way. At least for Bitcoin. I do like Moneros dynamic block size too, Ethereums sharding, and Nano's local chains, those solutions are all brilliant and much better ways of scaling.
So in conclusion, there's a lot of fake news in the media, from governments and from the banks. And the whole Bitcoin + all the forks is just confusing for everyone who doesn't know about crypto, so stop being a bitch about it, it only makes you look bad.
My advice: don't buy Bitcoin, buy Ethereum, Monero, Nano and some other coins who's tech and properties you like instead.
You don't understand what I'm saying.
The original Bitcoin would have set up a completely independent financial system with a peer-to-peer, near instant and near free (think 00.00001 fees on any transaction) payments that gave people complete and decentralized control over their finances. Then, as a hedge against certain forms of early attack, a temporary block size limit was put into place, with the full understanding of everyone from Satoshi on down that it was to be removed immediately once the system could handle the worrisome attack.
What happened next was interests from outside pounced on the system's primary vulnerability: the social control of the codebase. Through ousting of original Bitcoin insiders like Gavin Andresen and the installation of clearly incompetent or controlled figures through Blockstream, the temporary limit was, through tons of infighting, censorship, and disinfo campaigns coordinated through social media (twitter, reddit) and official internet channels (bitcointalk forums), ensconced as a permanent feature. This was sold at the time through clearly bunk argumentation that it's not worth going into right now.
The salient result of this block size limit is that block space is now artificially limited. Artificially restricted. This causes the average fee to skyrocket, and even worse, bakes in the potential for enormous explosions in fee price as happened in Dec 2017 -- any time the network becomes too heavily used, its fee and the wait time increase exponentially.
Now, other than clearly destroying what was to be a peer-to-peer cash system, why is this important?
Well, again the outside-invested companies like Blockstream develop "second layer" solutions that allow people to use their tokens in transactions that will then only much later, and through Blockstream and friends, be settled on the BTC chain itself. But of course these second layer networks are privately and centrally controlled. They share none of the properties of the base Bitcoin layer that made it revolutionary, free, and valuable. Once this setup is accepted, BTC has become completely co-opted and under the control of status quo financial interests, since they will control the hubs and the centers of power over the network.
During all of those people quite aware of the bullshit created spaces for uncensored talk, like /r/btc (rather than the sewer that is /r/bitcoin), and originalist Bitcoiners forked away and formed Bitcoin Cash. It is now the only reasonable fork of Bitcoin worth calling Bitcoin. BTC is not Bitcoin any longer, though through the disinfo and capture of exchanges and the like they kept the brand and ticker name. But it's a shambling corpse with the face of Bitcoin sewn on....
Where is a good place to learn about crypto, I would love to diversify.
/r/btc is decent.
This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^. If you think big banking cartels don't own this, you are crazy.
been saying this for years now
And again.