Reddit User Account Overview


Redditor Since June 30, 2018 (735 days old)
Karma Posts: 2,689 Comments: 49,255 Combined: 51,944
Active in

This should fit the sub /r/applesucks. Today I spotted some bad logic by no one less than /u/TBoneTheOriginal an /r/apple moderator. After 2 comments he deleted his comments, sent me an angry DM about being a poorboy for using an Android and then contacted the /r/android mods to delete my comment which had +80 upvotes. doesn't do it justice so I'll copy/paste the original comment that was censored: .............................................................................. Even better /r/apple mod /u/TBoneTheOriginal is defending Apple... after Apple made a statement where not paying the 30% is freeloading on the system. The cognitive dissonance is real. Sauce: > But it's not about the rules, it's about the ideoligies. Apple accuses Spotify of taking a "free ride" while they're literally doing the same thing on the play store. **edit1:** aaaand /u/TBoneTheOriginal an /r/apple moderator deleted this comments after failing to twist logic his way: **edit2:** /u/TBoneTheOriginal has sent me an angry DM telling me how naughty I am and to enjoy my poorboy phone lol **edit3:** For those that don't understand the logic: A) Apple said Spotify freerides when it doesn't pay a 30% cut. B) Apple doesn't pay Google's 30% cut. C) Then by Apple's own words, Apple is freeriding.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 19, 2020 13:08:40

So i have 3 factories: One for iron+copper, one for steel/silicon and one for the Recycler for just making credits. At this moment all my items are full, ie I cannot claim anymore and there's no more space in transit. The only factory that is able to work is the Recycler as it just recycles silicon to credits and I collect the credits. Now here's the bug. Recyler is producing credits at 3credits per second and substance is at 0 since I'm net negative. Now despite the other 2 factories being backed up and cannot produce a single item if I turn of the 2 backup factories, I become substance positive, credit gain kicks up to 3.5+credits per second etc. - Why doesn't the game figure out that if I factories are backed up they shouldn't consume substance? Why do I have to turn of the factory to allow substance to be used for factories that aren't backed up in this case credits? - Similar bug but on a smaller level: In my iron factory I have 1 Synthesizer making all my iron which produces all the iron products. As some iron products back up the excess should flow down the line and allow further iron products to produce faster since now they're getting more resources. Instead everything is calculated on a global level and the furthest products on that assembly line are always statically producing at the same rate regardless. I understand this isn't Factorio were every single inserter action isn't calculated, but imo these are some big oversights and it would be cool to fix them. **Maybe start small and aim low and if an entire factory is backed up, then it should not consume substance, to allow other factories to use that substance.**

posted by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 19, 2020 09:04:22

There's a trend that's been going around for a while comparing Apple's longer software support for iOS devices versus various Android manufacturer's shorter term software support. From what I've seen this topic is often brought up as a black and white deal and the only thing compared is support time while all other details pertaining to software updates are ignored. I'm here to compare software updates in detail and give a proper comparison, to show that updates bring both good and bad outcomes to devices. Lets discuss some general outcomes and impacts of a software update that many people don't seem to be aware of: 1) **Software updates will make your device slower:** Your hardware does not change, but each software update is more demanding on the hardware making your phone slower. That fancy snappy iPad you purchased on day 1 will look like an Android from 2010 which lags, skips and stutters after 5 years of updates. The hardware isn't able to keep up with the more demanding software and this affects Android, iOS, Windows, Macs. Ever try to install Windows 10 on a computer that came installed with Windows XP? It'll run, but it won't be pretty. This applies to both Android and iPhone and all computers. If you don't believe me dig up a 5 year old iPad and update it as far as it can go. Then take a look at the stutters, hiccups and other bugs. I'm 100% sure new iPads don't stutter or hiccup. 2) **When you perform an update there is a chance you may regress in features and even lose features altogether**, simply because the manufacturer decides what goes in the update. It's generally expected that a software update will bring new features and fixes, but it can and has brought negatives in the past as well. Take for example Apple crippling Facetime on older phones, [simply because Apple decided it's cheaper to settle with affected iPhone users than paying for a patent.]( Apple has literally decided to screw over the user because of surprise, surprise.. money! Samsung has done similar stuff to their features and Sony I think botched camera updates in the past making their camera worse. At times it's a gamble and you may want to have other users download updates and get feedback on changes before blindly updating on your phone. Another example is Apple's throttling of older phones due to battery issues where users weren't aware why their phone was acting slow all of a sudden. There's many examples of phones losing features, functions breaking as well as purposely being crippled. At the end of the day when you download an update you're giving the manufacturer consent to do anything on your phone, good or bad. 3) **iOS has more frequent updates because they have to.** iOS's design issue is that many system apps are bundled with the entire operating system, so in order to update a single app, an entire OS update has to be applied. Take for example Apple Music which can be installed on both iOS and Android, on iOS, this app can only be updated via a system update, while on Android you update a single app via the Playstore. There are dozens of system apps that Apple can only update from software updates which is why they more frequent updates. In return Apple fanboys think they're getting more attention and this plays into Apple's marketing. There's no advantage to Apple's method and in fact they are moving away from this model as a result as some apps are being delivered as standalone apps. However as a side effect to the layperson it appears as if Apple is more software update conscious when in fact the same apps on Android are receiving regular updates via the Playstore. 4) **Software updates are forced onto iOS users** so despite knowing these possible downfalls of software updates iOS users are helpless to do anything about them. From what I've seen on iOS, you receive regular popup nags to update to the latest iOS update. Sure there's a "Not Now" button, but when it nags you everyday, eventually you'll just give in for the sake of being annoyed at the nagging. On Android Android manufacturers give you an option to disable update checking in the Developers Option section and it just works.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 15, 2020 13:44:06

I had a discussion with /u/nullc aka Greg Maxwell former CTO from Blockstream and Bitcoin Core developer. In the discussion with him he refused to continue the discussion unless you agreed to some "Boston agreement". Don't ask me what it is, I googled it and have no clue wtf a Boston agreement is. I told him to just dump the data and be done with it. Just for reference the argument was back and forth for a while and about 20 comments deep so most redditors don't dig that deep and the conversation would not be visible to most users unless you followed that thread to the end. **This is a key detail.** The other key detail is that all 3 of these sock puppet accounts along with Maxwell understood what a Boston agreement is, and acted as "witnesses". Kind of odd since Google doesn't even have a definition for it. So either they've been notified to play along or are just are in sync with Maxwell's trolling. Long story short, 3 separate accounts all "witnessed" Greg Maxwell's agreement as well as harassed me about the agreement **despite being inactive for 3-7 days prior.** - /u/midmagic replied [here]( but his last activity was over 3 days ago [here]( > \o I agree to commit to 500239 deleting his account when he inevitably loses. - /u/cannedcaveman replied [here]( and yet his last activity was 3 days ago [here]( > You already lost this argument many posts ago, give it up dude. You’ve been obliterated and now it is time to delete your account like nullc has deleted your credibility. > F. - /u/trilli0nn replied [here]( but his previous activity was 2 days ago [here]( > Herewith my support for the Boston Agreement. I feel deeply concerned for the mental health of Bitmain shill u/500239 having to endure your relentless public humiliation. > It would be in his own interest to urgently delete his account and stop being an easy target to your ass-handing ways. > (I will miss the entertainment though so part of me hopes u/500239 weasels their way out and given their post history that is the expected outcome). The explanation is simple: 1) Either these 3 accounts have been stalking me to be able to jump on a thread that was 20 comments deep. or 2) Greg Maxwell notified these accounts to jump and brigade on your conversation within minutes that it was happening Looks like Greg Maxwell is back to manipulating forums much like he had a history of manipulating Wikipedia and other information mediums. **edit1:** Another minor detail. I've never been called a "Bitmain shill" ever. This week 2 people to call me a Bitmain shill have been Greg Maxwell and /u/trilli0nn . Pretty specific if you ask me. **edit2:** Last person to request I delete my account was /u/BeardedCake, who is now banned from this subreddit for continued user harassment.... Coincidentally ever since his ban his account has been inactive so it's possible he rotated to another bought account. I've been asked by 3 users in no less than 1 month to delete my account, and attempting to guilt, harass and threaten me until I do so. It's another attempt to censor outside of /r/bitcoin where normally the moderators there would just delete information they didn't approve of.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 11:26:09

I upgraded my desktop computer to something newer and decided to use the old desktop for an Unraid server, since I had a stash of many disks with different sizes. Over the last 10 years the older desktop had many disks shuffled around as sometimes I needed a disk for another project, or I upgraded the disk size etc. I didn't think much of my behavior of moving disks around until this week. So I powered on my desktop with Unraid and immediately Unraid starting throwing notifications of Bad CRC's, read errors, even disabling entire disks in the UI. 1st it was one disk, then another, then a 3rd disk, all on 3 different sata ports. Some of these disks had SMART logs saying 7 years of run time, so I chalked it up to a failing disk. I did have 1 frayed sata cable so I replaced it an interestingly enough the same disk started working fine with no smart errors. Other cables were not frayed or pressed in sharp angles so I didn't think much of them. I purchased 6 new Sata Cables this week and replaced all the sata cables in that PC. 0 problems with any disk in that PC and Unraid hasn't reported and disk errors, CRC errors, or read errors. Who knew Sata cables were that fragile? **edit**: 10 original drives total, 2 parity all are fine. Parity completed without issues. Bad Sata cables confirmed. took slightly over 1 day to complete.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/unRAID on June 8, 2020 11:48:37

Tried the game for a week, spent $10 total on gems, here are my thoughts and why I won't be playing this game anymore: **The good:** - Yes it's a Factorio rip off for mobile. Has belts, inserters, smelters, splitters etc. However it's a pro because their execution of putting Factorio on Mobile is A+ at worst B+. I especially love the idea of multiple sectioned factories so you can control what you make. - Graphics are very nice and fluid for the most part **The Bad**: - **Heavy paywalled.** I mean super heavy. And this is from a guy who's played Clash of Clans, Clash Royale and a few other triple A p2w games. For reference I've put around $400 in Clash of Clans, $500 in Clash Royale and a few hundred in other p2w games. I'm no cheapo but it's pretty clear the "value" that you get from gems is horrible. And I used to think Supercells' Clash Royale had shitty offers that only got worse every year and THAT's saying something. - To expand your factory you need to essentially play casino and gamble for exotic parts that you yourself cannot produce just to unlock sections of the factory. Applies to quests, factory floor unlock and research, ie all 3 major parts of the game. It doesn't matter how efficient or fast your factory is at making parts, the casino gambling aspect of needing exotic parts that you can't make is your bottleneck anyway. So basically progress is capped to how much you pay. Factory setup can't change this. - You can only do 1 quest at a time, meaning you need to log into the game every 4 hours assuming you're level8 or so. Tedious. - Based on some napkin math the best use for gems is to buy the speedups for quest. It boosts quests 60x for 12 hours or 1 day depending on how many gems you spent. However it's annoying that you must baby the quests all day every 20 minutes to 1 hour to make sure you get all the value from that boost? It's a really unreasonable and leaves a bad taste in your mouth. You spend 250 gems for a speed up and then must be tied to the game like a slave to open and keep queueing quests for the day rather than the game just auto opening the quests or something similar. - The game has some bugs and occasionally crashes, but imo I'm not taking any points of for this. It's playable and only released last month so give it some time. - Game really eats through battery. Like really power hungry. No settings to turn down graphics options or anything else to help alleviate the battery drain. It's a shame because the game is 5 star in every other area but the paywall which is rammed down your throat.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 2, 2020 11:06:55

I was recommended to try OpenMediaVault for my Nas needs and so I tried it. It looked like a promising solution but ended up struggling and failing just to get basics to work. Here's my summary: 1) Burning the ISO to boot from USB "works" but no matter what when it comes time to partition the host drive it will fail. For both HDD's and SDD's. It does however recognize them. Burned it via Rufus. 2) Googling recommended actually burning a physical CD instead... Yeah I know. So I dug up a DVD sata drive from my basement and got to work. Guess what... OMV only recognizes some HDD's, 0 SSD's at all.... 3) Naturally I want to install the system on an SSD so it's more reponsive, so I installed OMV from a DVD onto an HDD and then use DiskDestroy (dd) to clone the HDD install to and same size SDD. Yes I got it to boot from the SSD. 4) Now one would think the bugs and horror stories are over. Nope. After letting OMV boot from the SSD and doing some updates for OMV, it does not recognize half my HDD's. One 3TB disk it sees, another 3TB it doesn't, both connected via SATA. Several other disks it also doesn't notice including some older 500GB HDD's. I threw in the towel. How can this nas solution be so incompetent? Can anyone share similar horror stories with OMV? Any alternatives? Thinking of looking at Xpenology next.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/DataHoarder on May 28, 2020 10:11:52

This recent patch gave us the rich asteroid which spawns once per day in a red star until you get it. It's quite a chunk of money so no doubt it will cause players to change their gameplay to pursue this chunk of change. 1) What outcome do you think the dev's were going for by adding this item? - I think the dev's wanted players to play Red stars more regularly by forcing them to enter a red star daily. This might help smooth out the playing times evenly across the week so that players have a higher chance of finding other players in red stars and an easier time working together, versus lets say just weekend players. 2) What are some unintended consequences of the asteroid? - Personally I run RS7, soon RS8, but since my red star scanner can go to RS9, I do RS9 runs to grab the highest level of this asteroid that I can. I think we'll witness some games were red star players join games just to grab this roid and not contribute to the red star game mode. It might disrupt some games when some players are not contributing. 3) This asteroid is quite a big chunk of change? Why do you think the dev's were so generous? - My theory is that with each update, older players get a significant leg up since they've already researched tech that now increases in cost. By giving new players this chunk of change it might make the sour taste a bit sweeter. - I think they want to reward daily players more than players who log in every few days. Any other views and impacts of this new daily item?

posted by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 20, 2020 09:00:42

We know high fees is what caused big merchants like Steam and Microsoft to stop using Bitcoin as well as many smaller merchants. Bitcoin Maxi's attempt to spin the argument but these merchants have explicitly stated that **high fees and uncertain confirmation times due to a clogged blockchain were the reason for dropping Bitcoin** as a payment option. Sauce: But the other important part that most don't realize, and this is key, is that by pushing p2p electronic cash to a 2nd layer, ie Lightning, they've also nullified all the existing adoption for Bitcoin that was supported up until now. This is because merchants that accepted Bitcoin don't necessarily accept Lightning by default and more importantly Lightning still isn't production ready. Bitcoin is still in a limbo where the p2p electronic cash function is not ready for production use. Hell we still have the Lightning developers themselves warning users: **"Don't put more money on Lightning than you're willing to lose!"** So not only did Blockstream scaling plan for Bitcoin halt Bitcoin adoption, it also nullified all adoption at this point because merchants now need to adopt Lightning which is forever 18 months away for the last 6 years now with no end in sight. Who wants to use a blockchain that costs whole dollars in fees, or risk getting stuck in the blockchain for over 2 weeks:

posted by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 19, 2020 09:24:36

Today I'm debating regular troll /u/BeardedCake here who makes this statement: > [Are you really this naive to assume that majority of BCH hashrate does not come from Bitmain? If Btimain flips a switch, 90%+ of BCH hashrate disappears and similar is true for around 60-70% of BTC's hashrate.]( - /u/BeardedCake In a nutshell /u/BeardedCake claims the following: - 90% of Bitcoin Cash's hashrate comes from Bitmain - 60%-70% of Bitcoin's hashrate comes from Bitmain ...His own words. For the sake of the conversation I'm not even going to argue against his statement, instead just use it against him because he just cornered himself. After several attempts of his to put words in my mouth, I asked him to quote me, which he was unable to. *Shocking I know.* Mostly because he realized his logic and reading comprehension skills are stunted to a 3rd grade level. Instead he decides to rush and reach a unique conclusion of his own: > [OK good now we can agree that BCH is centralized shitcoin just like 99% of all other altcoins. Everything else does not matter.]( - /u/BeardedCake *The illogical and conflicting views of troll BeardedCake should be glaringly obvious by now.* Let me make it very easy for even the least technical person in this forum to understand: **Q: How much hashrate does it take to centralize a coin?** **A: Hashrate over 50%** And he just claimed Bitmain controls **90% of BCH's hashrate** and **60%-70% of Bitcoin's hashrate** both which are over 50%. Yet he claims only BCH is centralized, not Bitcoin despite in his own words saying Bitmain controls 60%-70% of Bitcoin's hashrate. By his own words and views he should have also mentioned that Bitcoin is a centralized shitcoin just like 99% of all other altcoins. Ladies and Gentlemen this is the average intelligence of trolls around here. They reach conclusions that conflict with their own views and statements.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/btc on April 17, 2020 14:06:32

It's known that /r/bitcoin heavily censors any topics critical of Blockstream or Core. As a result /r/btc was formed and looks to avoid censorship by giving people benefit of the doubt and a [public mod log]( which /r/bitcoin removed. The obvious result of /r/btc relaxed moderation policy is that trolls spend a lot of time here gaslighting their users and often times won't be banned until it gets out of hand. *This week we're going to take a look at /u/aviathor and his method of gaslighting users.* 1) If you aren't aware /u/aviathor is on a several month spree telling users the correct names for Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash. You can see many of his comments are the same copy paste comment with lots of bold use: > **Calling Bitcoin "Bitcoin Core" is equivalent to calling Bitcoin Cash "Bcash"** And yet here he is using 6+ names for Bitcoin Cash, including the Bcash name he was advocating against. > What is [Bcash]( > What is [BcashABC]( > What is [Bcrash]( > What is [Bitcoin Clashic]( > What is ["Bitcoin (ABC real BCH)"]( > What is ["Bitcoin Cash ABC Cool"]( 2) Yet he has no problem gaslightning users that the usage of "Bcash" is fine, because wikipedia was brigaded to include it and former Blockstream employees like Greg Maxwell were caught abusing and editing wikipedia until they were banned. Another excuse of his is that Amaury used it once in /r/bitcoin: 3) OK fine, let him have it, but then when you point out that /u/aviathor has used 6 other terms for Bitcoin Cash, NOT included in wikipedia **he goes silent every time:** > How come you didn't get this upset when you used up to 6 different names for Bitcoin Cash? > What is [Bcash]( > What is [BcashABC]( > What is [Bcrash]( > What is [Bitcoin Clashic]( > What is ["Bitcoin (ABC real BCH)"]( > What is ["Bitcoin Cash ABC Cool"]( > It was a pleasure to call out your hypocrisy. > Are all of these in wikipedia too? The lesson here is don't let the Core/Blockstream trolls gaslight you. They act like they're on a mission to correct users, but when you post proof of them doing the same exact thing that they're crying about, there's never any response, they just dip. They only get upset when users flip the Blockstream propaganda campaign against them. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/btc on April 16, 2020 10:00:51

Had a discussion with /u/dugg and he made a bold claim that BTC halving will only decrease block reward by 36%. Comment here: > [Also last little tidbit from myself, BCH dropped 50% in rewards where as BTC would only drop 36% if it was to halve today. This is due to Bitcoins fees. BCH is forever getting further and further away from Bitcoin in value and security.]( A quick look at will tell you every 10 minutes a Bitcoin block gives miners $92k in the Coinbase reward and an additional $1k-$2k in Bitcoin fees. A quick glance would tell you BTC transctions fees are around 1-2% of the total block reward. When pressed further check out the math a Blockstream/Core supporter uses. Seriously. > [I'm a stronger character than you by being able to admit when I'm wrong, but I tell you what, just for you I will show you how your community claim of 50$ fees are even better than 36% I calculated wrong.]( > [92k + 93k = 182k, 46k + 93k = 139k, 139k / 182k = 76%, 100% - 76% = 24% drop in fees]( Seriously did /r/bitcoin censorship drive down the intelligence down this low?

posted by /u/500239 in /r/btc on April 10, 2020 11:05:41

I'm a long time OpenVPN user and I'm looking to make the switch to Wireguard as I hear it has some notable benefits over OpenVPN which include: - twice as fast connection speeds. - no initial handshake - Can run on Android 24/7 without draining more battery. I hear it doesn't need to ping the server periodically to maintain a persistent connection. Over the last few weeks I've been reading these forums and google's results on how to's and tried 1 attempt with a manual setup using this guide: It ultimately failed because the Android client was complaining about not being able to find the server address. As well as the guide not describing how to place a domain name instead of a public IP for the server. The guide felt too minimal. After some further reading I'm starting to learn that the setup+benefits of Wireguard are not 1-to-1 with OpenVPN and I'm fuzzy on what's correct and isn't and how to set it up so that it'll work like OpenVPN did. In the past I setup an OpenVPN server on Ubuntu in VMWare on a Synology box and all was OK. I could connect from my Android phone to my home server and access my SMB share, entire lan as well as continue using apps on Android without any traffic being blocked. Strictly speaking the OpenVPN connection was used to access my home network, NOT to tunnel all traffic over it. I'd like to do the same using Wireguard instead. Here are my questions about Wireguard: 1) Is there an easy GUI installer? So far I've found this and will try it this week: I tried the manual way found here: But ended up having the Android client fail to connect, despite all ports forwarded, therefore I'm leaning on a GUI installer next attempt to catch these mistakes and avoid mismatching configs or allowed IP's w/e. 2) If I setup a Wireguard connection will my Android phone be able to see the home network lan by default or is there some config settings I need to add? 3) I'd like the Wireguard connection to allow access to my lan but NOT force all traffic through it. Which way is Wireguard configured by default and how do I set it as expected? 4) I've heard that for mobile clients to save on battery the periodic ping must be set to 0 somewhere. Is this setting found in the official Wireguard app, or some internal setting in Android via ADB? anyone have experience with this?

posted by /u/500239 in /r/WireGuard on March 30, 2020 15:07:55

I see a lot of players install teleport on transports in their 1 support slot especially in RS7+. My clan recommends it as well, but I'm not quite sold. Sell me on teleport or sanctuary or timewarp. Here are my views: - I like having sanctuary installed because it means I can be interrupted by real life events and I can forget to manage my ships in RS, return and have all my ships intact. Hades Star becomes a totally casual game. By definition other than losing too many credit battles in Blue Stars I can never "rollback" my progress, which is something I love in Hades Star. It's unlike Clash of Clans where I can get raided and rolled back in progress. I rarely go afk in RS events, but it happens once in a while when you have a kid. - I use 3 miners with 50 seconds of RSE each, which at RS7 seems to be plenty. I plan to upgrade RSE further. - Sell me on the time saving aspect of teleport. It seems marginal or niche. Transports teleport to planet and get a jump on loading artifacts but often times are landlocked and prevented from returning to gate until you clear some sectors. With a 5 minute cooldown, in theory you're able to use it 3 times with some RSE use. On average how much faster is loading arts with teleport over sanctuary? Assuming you enter a system with 6 transports, on average how many more loads are you getting? - RS6 teleport definitely isn't needed. I can solo RS6 no problem and collect all 4 planets usually with some light RSE use. RS7 has changed that and I assume RS8+ will as well. Is there an RS at which teleport changes from optional to must or becomes a clear difference in time saving?

posted by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on March 25, 2020 08:55:03

Last week there was a discussion on [benefits over Omega and Passive]( and ultimately the only benefit to passive shield was it's "hydro efficiency". However when asked for the break even point I was given estimates and nothing concrete, ultimately leaving the efficiency of passive shield questionable and unconfirmed. - Some users like /u/notafunhater estimated [break even point was 10-12 sectors moved.]( - While others users like /u/smithandjohnson only had a gut feeling about [break even point based on what their teammates complaints were.]( I did the math to figure out how many sectors must a battleship with passive shield move through to use the same amount of hydrogen as an Omega shield of the same level. 1) Passive shield provides hydrogen used per AU, but we don't know how many AU's is one sector across. So lets figure out how many AU's is one sector across. The easiest way to calculate sector size in AU units is to take a look at the Teleport module and it's range diagram found here: - - As you can see in a Yellow Star system a level 10 teleport can travel 3,000AU. Starting from the center of the circle and counting outwards I estimate 3,000AU is about 4.5 sectors total. 1/2 sector from center and 4 sector past that until we reach the lvl10 circle perimeter. **Therefore 3,000AU = 4.5 sectors, and 1 sector is 666.6AU/1sector. Of course we're comparing the shortest distance across a single sector and not the longest line able to be drawn across a sector, so this is actually more favorable to the passive shield with these values. 2) Passive shield hydrogen cost per sector. - Level 10 passive shield costs 66hydrogen/100AU, giving us 0.66hydrogen/1AU. Converting to hydrogen per sector we get 440hydrogen/1sector. - Level 12 passive shield costs 74hydrogen/100AU, giving us 0.74hydrogen/1AU. Converting to hydrogen per sector we get 493hydrogen/1sector. 3) Omega shield costs are static: - level 10 omega shield costs 3500 hydrogen per activation. - level 12 omega shield costs 4000 hydrogen per activation. 4) **At equal level shields** how many sectors must a battleship move to break even? - at level10 shields, passive shield ship must move 3500/440 = **7.95 sectors** to break even with omega shield use - at level 12 shields, passive shield ship must move 4000/493 = **8.11 sectors** to break even with omega shield use 5) **Bonus Round:** But wait we're not done yet. So for we compared break even at equal shield level, but as we know omega shields give us more shields at even levels or less per usage. **So lets now compare shields at equivalent shield amount:** I'll do 2 comparison again, a max shield comparison and somewhat typical/average seen shield comparison: - A level 12 passive shield has 19k shields and is comparable to a level 10 omega shield with 18.5k shields, only 500 shield difference versus a 1k difference at for an omega lvl 11. - A lvl 10 passive shield has 16k shields and is comparable to a level 8 omega at 15.5k shields, only 500 shield difference versus a 1k difference for an omega 9 shield. Therefore comparing these 2 sets we get: - lvl12 passive vs lvl10 omega. 3500/493 = **7.1 sectors** becomes the break even point - lvl10 passive vs lvl8 omega. 2500/440 = **5.68 sectors** becomes the break even point. 6) **Conclusion:** It seems the Omega shield break even movement count is much less than previously estimated. For a typical Red Star run, moving around 5-8 sectors depending on shield levels and breaking even and saving hydrogen seems more likely with Omega shield than passive shield. This is of course assuming you're sweeping 2-3+ planets in a single run red star run. With Red Star Extender being a common module used in higher levels it seems passive shield does not really provide a significant hydrogen advantage, in addition to all the numerous disadvantages it has to Omega shield, like versatility, better synergy with salvage, no recharge cooldown reset by attacks, etc. Quite surprising to be honest. I was expecting a bigger gap in efficiency like the user estimation of 10-12 sectors, versus the 5-8 sectors. Sources: The Hades star wiki:

posted by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on March 13, 2020 11:32:53

In b4 Linux/Ubuntu is open source if you want a feature you should code it. So I recently purchased a Synology NAS and setup an SMB share with a username/password. Windows 10 lists the network share and asks me to provide a username password when attempting to connect and it works after that. Ubuntu on the other hand will list the same network share via the file explorer but any attempts at providing the username/password fail. Synology's support page provides command line instructions on how to connect to a passworded network share. Additionally Ubuntu lists the same network share twice, one version asking for a username/domain/password and the other just plain username/password. Both fail to connect, even when attempting to prepend the WORKGROUP before the username. I've tried all permutations on both GUI options. What gives and why is connecting to technology(SMB/Network shares) that has existed for 2 decades still require command line and no GUI? Back in 2010 I remember plugging in a USB drive required typing out commands and specific to the file system on the drive, but even that works like a charm more or less in 2020. Do the Ubuntu dev's not use passworded smb shares that they have not thought to finally make a GUI that works? or am I missing something? We keep bringing up that Ubuntu/Linux and yeah XXXX is year of deskptop linux but then we have situations like this. For reference in the past I used an Unraid server and setup a passwordless smb share and Ubuntu file explorer and GUI handled that just fine. But going one step further and attempting to use a passworded share is a no go.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/Ubuntu on January 17, 2020 12:44:49

**Background:** - I have a lvl8 shipment relay so I can relay 11 planets. My usual routine is relaying 11 planets in the morning and dumping shipments from 3 trades+1 planet onto the nearest shipment relayed planets. 2 starting planets in the same sector are for artifact storage. At the end of the day I dump the 3 trades+1 planet once again with ~2-4 hours left on the shipment relay planet. This routine is very efficient timewise and action wise as I only have to check in twice a day. - However the downside is I get no bonuses on shipments from either ship comp or shipment drone, so I'd like to find a warp lane equivalent or similar time efficient method. - I also have enough warp lanes at this time to link a total of 8 planets on the warp lane network. This would also leave a total of 8 planets/trades outside the warp lane network. So at 50-50 split on in network and out of network. A lvl4 shipment drone equipped on all TS. lvl3 shipment beam, and a lvl2 shipment comp as I don't use that mod much. **Current plan:** If I decide to use warp lanes + shipment drone, statistically it should clear 50% of shipments on all in-lane planet assuming half shipments are destined for in network and half out. However I'd assume mid day I'd have to go to each planet and clear the rest manually or cast shipment relay mid day to clear the rest. Gas cost is not that big of an issue as I'm still hydro positive through the week. Optimizing for time, not hydro and ignoring stacking shipments for shipment comp, what's a time efficient or shipment destination agnostic way of handling shipments?

posted by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on January 2, 2020 10:49:35

Been playing Blue star since day 1, got the blue star logo for being top 50 in a season and while I love playing this mode, there are quite a bit of faults with its matchmaking. I'm speaking from experience so while it may seem like I'm just complaining, I've been on both sides as both the abuser and abusee of the blue star match making. Here's my summary of its issues: 1) **Problem:** No idea why Red Star scanner level is factored into blue star match making but it is. Naturally I've abused this by keeping my RS scanner low and having a diplo parter feed me arts to compensate. At one point I had 3 support slot BS with a lvl4 RS scanner and I shit you not 4 out of 5 matches only gave me 3-4 AI ships and rarely 1 human. I could literally count on one hand how many matches I played in those 2 months were I had 2 people with it. Needless to say those daily credit wins were a breeze. **Solution:** Make matchmaking rely only on battleship level and mod levels. Don't factor in Red Star scanner level. The moment I upgraded RS scanner no more 4 AI ships per match. 2) **Problem**: Blue Star leaderboard is a complete joke. A few months ago #1 Blue star leader was a fresh new account with 1 support slot. I assume the easy early blue star levels made it a breeze for him compared to players in the harder blue stars. He had an obscene shard count compared to even player #2. **Solution**: Either have separate tiers of BLS leaderboards or set a minimum ship level before you can be placed on the leader board. 3) **Problem**: Sanctuary vs Non-Sanctuary ship matches need to be split up. The battleships with sanctuary at times go rabid and just go all out and attack non-sanc ships just to troll and destroy their ship even if they will place 5th. Again I've abused and been abused in this position. Since I play BLS many times a day I'm usually just sending in Sanc'ed ships to troll and harass the non-sanc ships to cripple their chances at winning, by either putting them in an awful position or chipping a lot of shields/hp from them to put them at a severe disadvantage. And again it costs the sanced ship players nothing. **Solution**: Matches should be split into 2 groups: Ships with Sanctuary and ships without. 4) **Problem:** Omega rocket fed players. Clearly some of these players have been fed max tetrahedrons to unlock lvl1 omega rocket. Puts other players at a severe disadvantage. **Solution:** Fine have your omega rocket, but be weighted into the higher rings by placing more matchmaking weight on high level modules such as these. To some extent Bond is also being gamed this way. There are some other issues with BLS and some dirty hacks but more or less these are the main issues that stand out in what otherwise is a very enjoyable game. If the matchmaking pool becomes thinned out simply increase the 1 min wait time to 2-3 minutes or so. Reasonable to me.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on December 2, 2019 16:27:17

In some recent comments [Bitcoin Core supporters are telling people Lightning is optional]( and I agree. However if you think Lightning is optional then you limit your options even further when using Bitcoin. Based on today's current state of Bitcoin here are your options when using Bitcoin to send cash: 1) onchain Bitcoin with a low fee: Security + Low fee = Slow confirmation time 2) onchain Bitcoin with a high fee: Security + High fee = Fast confirmation time (So long as no one outbids you out of the block during times of high volume) 3) Lightning: Low fee + Fast transaction time(no confirmation as Lightning transactions are not confirmed onchain until you close your channel) = No Security examples of each is: 1) Tony Vays sent a Bitcoin transaction with a **"low fee" of $0.25 that took 11 hours to confirm** and probably would have taken longer if [SlushPool didn't manually add his transaction]( I'm being liberal with "low" because anyone using cash today does not pay $0.25 extra for a transaction to buy coffee. 2) Exchange withdrawals: Usually exchanges raise the fee several levels higher to ensure the confirmation goes through sooner than later. You've probably heard of /r/bitcoin users complaining about this, but this is just the cost of good business. Exchanges don't want users complaining about waiting 11 hours and creating unnecessary support tickets because Bitcoin is congested. 3) Lightning has low fees and fast tx times, but until your close that Lightning channel that transaction is still unconfirmed onchain and anything can happen. This is why /r/bitcoin users recommend using watchtower services to secure your Lightning funds, as someone must always be watching over your funds to prevent them from being stolen. If you stay offline for too long your funds may be stolen. Until your close your LN channel your must check in on your Lightning funds periodically to defend against theft attempts as you become the security of your funds, not the Bitcoin blockchain. So this is the convoluted state of Bitcoin today. A Rube Goldberg vision of p2p digital cash where first you must decide on your priorities and only then then transfer funds between Bitcoin or Lightning as necessary before deciding to send someone cash. Not very frictionless cash is it... Or you can just use Bitcon Cash which has none of these complications and just works.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/btc on November 26, 2019 13:01:33

Hi I'm a Bitcoin Cash supporter, just being upfront about that. No I'm not here to shill BCH. Recently Vechain news was censored by /r/cryptocurrency so this might be of interest to you community. Today I have a topic that I think we can all agree on: /r/CryptoCurrency censorship and I think it applies to you community as well. Yesterday and today /r/btc found undeniable proof with sources that /r/cryptocurrency is delisting positive threads about coins they don't like, next day to prevent positive threads from being searched later on. They do this once people cool off. Yes it's about Bitcoin Cash, but I'm sure the VeChain community has experienced this as well, especially with the recent censoring of VeChain major alliance with China. Congratulations by the way! Feel free to discuss and of course be respectful to all sides. The point of this thread is to bring awareness to the underhanded tactics employed by head moderators like /u/jwinterm and it's not the 1st time he's been censoring coins he doesn't like: /r/cryptocurrency is the new /r/bitcoin of censorship now

posted by /u/500239 in /r/Vechain on November 21, 2019 11:58:46

There's a thread in /r/bitcoin right now where a user discusses his options for how to pass on his Bitcoin's if he should pass and leave this world. Ultimately the thread concludes that there is no such automated solution and you would need to rely on a 3rd party to pass on your Bitcoin's when you pass or do scatter your seed words in several geographic locations and all sorts of hoops for what seems a basic feature of smart money. Thankfully Bitcoin Cash has a solution for this problem. Compare this same scenario that many will face to Bitcoin Cash using Licho's Last Will script: > - Security level of cold storage, > - Noncustodial, > - Permission-less, > - Implements a dead man's switch with a 6 months will trigger, > - If you don't refresh your Last Will contract for 6 months, funds become available for your inheritor, No one thinks they'll die before they do, until it happens and your family is unable to claim your crypto inheritance like so: > Last year, U.S. investor Matthew Mellon reportedly passed away with $500 million in cryptocurrencies but his heirs could not obtain the funds. Shout to to my boy, BCH polish developer /u/licho92 . This is just another example of what a community developed smart money can do when you let it grow naturally . If you found Licho's Last Will script useful, make sure to donate to his address to support these types of developments for Bitcoin Cash > Cash Account: Licho#14431 > bitcoincash:qq93dq0j3uez8m995lrkx4a6n48j2fckfuwdaqeej2 Just another example of yet another advantage Bitcoin Cash has over Bitcoin.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/btc on November 6, 2019 15:25:32

Long time exClash of Clans and exClash Royale player been playing Hades Star for a few months now. Game is great, level 143 player but there are some things I wished were fixed/improved. Hopefully the dev's lurk here and pick up on these minor issues that need to polished. Overall the things I love most about this game is Blue stars and how you can play the game at your own pace and own style. Collect shipments how you like and when you like etc. Not many games give you this freedom. This game feels less F2p and more like Zen Garden that I tune up every few hours or twice a day. These are mostly related to the mobile platform, and while the Steam version has these issues as well, the performance difference between mobile/PC tends to mask said issues. 1) When picking up artifacts one at a time in your own yellow star, or dropping them off, there is a "hiccup/pause" when doing so. It's annoying and often times it'll ignore your 2nd action until the art was registered as dropped off or pickup on the server. Sometimes the hiccup will be annoying enough that it'll load up the wrong items. Example: Bring a ts with 4 arts loaded on it and unload it one by one. You'll notice the hiccup, delay. Yes I can unload all at once with the unloadall/loadall button but sometimes I need to filter arts or shipments. 2) Red star now allows you queue loading arts, but no queueing for pathing after the ts is done loading. It's tedious to have to wait for several transports and keep track of times and who to handle first. WS has this option and RS improved since last patch, but it's still missing queueing of paths after the ts is done loading arts. 3) This game is all about being systematic and repetition, I get that. But can we have a button on the shipment relay station to "recast" the same sectors? I have a 11 sector shipment relay and each morning I re-mark the same 11 sectors. Been doing so for months now. I wish I had 1 button to do it all in one shot. 4) Similar to #3, warp lane recasting. Each morning I re-link the same warp lane pairs and each morning I have to do each one individually. I'd like some global button to relink all warp lanes from the last pairs that they were set to. 5) The "<" and ">" arrows when selecting ships is totally fucked. Example: I warp to a Red Star with 5 transports. I select any of the 5 and send it to a planet. I then hit the "<" or ">" button to cycle to the other transports and many times it'll cycle back to the 1st one, once or twice before cycling through to the ones still standing at the gate. Happens to all ship classes. For example I'll queue 1 Battleship to a sector and use the "<" or ">" button and it'll cycle to the 2nd ship and then back to the 1st instead of the 3rd. Basically if you have 5 ships and tap "<" 5 times I should be able to see each ship at least once. Instead what happens is some ships will be selected twice before the other ships will be selected. Very easy to reproduce. 6) Hydro farm farming. It's definitely an intended strategy and somewhat endorsed by the Genesis/Enrich but very impractical to farm in reality without babying the miner. You can have 15 roid farm maxed to 1500 hydro but collecting just 1 "pass" is near impossible without being cautious and watching on your miner periodically. Otherwise RIP hydro farm. We need a "farm 1 time" button or something as no combination of methods make hydro farming easy. And yes there's crunch but... One easy way, but even more tedious is to create farms in a diplo partner solar system. That way your miner will fill up and be prevented from dumping it's hydro and going back. but again it requires a lot of work to bring it back, empty it and resend it back to the diplo partners solar system, so not a great solution. 7) Sort of related to #1, but with movements for ships. Many times you plot the 1st waypoint and then immediately double tap that button to "confirm". But many times the confirm is ignored, or there is a "ui hiccup" that blocks the 2nd button press and sometimes does weird things or selects some wrong button. I've probably missed some but here are the ones off the top of my head. Thoughts?

posted by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on October 9, 2019 10:42:42

No this isn't a question about Warp Relay placements. **Some information upfront:** - I have a lvl8 Shipment relay which can relay up to 11 planets. - I have all planets unlocked besides the 2 Ice planets and of course I have 3 trade stations. 2 starting planets in the same sector are used for storing arts, so I don't collect those creds. - current credit cap is just above 2 million. **What I do now:** - I shipment relay 11 planets, use transports to move creds off the 3 trades stations with transports and 1 planet to the nearest 'shipment relayed' planets. Not bad. - My problems: Every few days I have to 'bleed' all planets from their crystal credits otherwise they just use up slots and possibly block new credits from rolling in. **What I have questions on:** 1) With a cap of 2 Mil how many warp pairs do I get? The wiki numbers seems off, because I already have 6 warp lane pairs and my next one costs $400k, but wiki says much higher. 2) I feel because I can't possibly get enough warp lanes to be 1-1 with every planet and trade station that my transition from pure shipment relays to warp lanes is just trading the same problem for itself. With shipment relays I need to bleed crystal shipments every few days. With warp lanes, I'll need to bleed all shipment (crystal or credit) on planets in the warp lane network that contain shipments outside of the warp lane network. Is it worth it, for a small boost with Shipment drone or just remain with ship relay? 3) How do you guys handle warp lane "bleeding"?

posted by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on September 26, 2019 09:21:11

Here's the uncensored archive, as I expected /u/jwinterm to censor my comments. He always does: Uncensored: Original Censored Thread: Basically I call out moderator of /cryptocurrency /u/jwinterm for censoring and being openly biased against certain cryptos like IOTA and BCH. I then point out the the moderators themselves have recently kicked a corrupt mod of their own Here's the text he deleted. Only one comment which was the one summarizing his bullshit: > You claim your mod team isn't biased, isn't getting paid and is all good people. > Yet I just showed you that: > your own mod team kicked one of your own moderators lol. And gave a reason why. > your not transparent to your own community, but other mods are. > You were caught lying today. Again. > And yet you get mad when someone posts the article that puts all your Reddit comments in on thread in a nice and easy place which openly shows your bias. I'd link to it, but you'd probably just ban me. and yet the article is just a collection of your comments, which have NOT been deleted and therefore publicly available lol. > I don't know do I need to use crayons to spell it out for you? Let me try an analogy and see if it helps you understand. > I'm sure you've been long enough on this planet to hear of Murphy's law right? In short Murphy's law says "Anything that can go wrong will go wrong". > > Let me give you an example, since you're playing dumb today with one word responses to serious accusation. Lets say John, Alex and Suzy Q went on a skying trip during the winter season. John in his hubris decided not to bring a spare battery for his camera because he charged it last night. However since it was an especially cold today during the winter the battery charge did not hold well and ran out 1 hour into the trip. Normally John would have been fine, but Murphy's law took care of the trip for him. > In your position as moderator you're not being transparent, you're openly being hostile to select cryptocurrencies and you claim you have no bias, but yet ban articles which is just a collection of your public and undeleted reddit comments because it exposes your nature. Murphy's law in this case would state if a corrupt mod acts corrupts and says he's not taking money, well then we can assume he eventually will or already has started accepting money. > That and I have DM's from posters like /u/1lost_king1 who regularly get threads frontpage on /r/cryptocurrencies telling me he pays a few moderators here with Banano. And don't act like you don't know. And spam posting stuff about /u/1lost_king1 is true. He went dark 30 days ago, the 1st time I openly called him out and he's pruned his account history but he's still posting as his other alias was /u/sha747 or something. When the mods are called out with specifics they delete. when they get DMed about this stuff they ignore it, knowing full well he got to skirt all the rules.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/btc on September 19, 2019 14:14:57

Ever notice as you discuss the chain of events that unfolded where Bitcoin is stuck at 4 TP and is not aiming to be p2p cash anymore trolls always resort to 1 parroted tactic: "Those 2 things are not related." even though: - Adam Back was for a blocksize increase before Blockstream got any funding: - Once Adam Back got $55 million from AXA he started fudding against blocksizes increases despite just being for them: - /r/Bitcoin and BitcoinTalk forums ONLY allowed discussion of SegWit. No blocksize increases. Coincidentally when BitcoinXT was breaching 50%. - It's funny how SegWit was voted on by miners with hashpower to activate SegWit. But when 90% of miners voted for the 2MB increase, it was not valid and Bitcoin Core and Blockstream vocally denounced them. - It's funny how when BitcoinXT was gaining 50% it wasn't a valid client and was censored all discussions of it. However UASF which was also non-miner voting, was OK. - From Bitcoin Core the only people who were pushed away were just the big blockers, Gavin Andresen, Mike Hearn, Jeff Garzik. - Brian Armstrong was also for big blocks and as a result he was banned in /r/bitcoin. No comments by /u/adam3us of course. He's never commented why he's happy to communicate in forums that are censored to only allow discussion of Blockstream products. - /r/bitcoin which is for Bitcoin discussion often allows discussion of Blockstream's Liquid product, tether and other altcoins. Litecoin was allowed as well during times of congestion as is Grin. Bitcoin Cash posts are only allowed if they are negative in tone. Blockstream must live in a perfect world as everyone is aligning with them and anti-Blockstream comments are removed. You can't even mention that Blockstream is funded by AXA in /r/bitcoin despite being able to mention any Blockstream product like Liquid.

posted by /u/500239 in /r/btc on September 10, 2019 12:03:56

**Thread topics include, but are not limited to:** * Discussion related to recent events * Technical analysis, trading ideas & strategies * General questions about altcoins **Thread guidelines:** * **Be excellent to each other.** * All regular rules for this subreddit apply, except for number 2. This, and only this, thread is exempt from the requirement that all discussion must relate to bitcoin trading. * This is for high quality discussion of altcoins. **All shilling or obvious pumping/dumping behavior will result in an immediate one day ban. This is your only warning.** * No discussion about specific ICOs. Established coins only. If you're not sure what kind of discussion belongs in this thread, [here]( [are]( [some]( [example]( [posts]( News, TA, and sentiment analysis are great, too. **Other ways to interact:** * [Get an invite]( to live chat on [our Slack group]( and check out the #altcoins channel * Daily Discussion for bitcoin only: [Daily Discussion]( * Prior Altcoin Discussion: [Altcoin Discussion](

posted by /u/500239 in /r/BitcoinMarkets on September 10, 2019 10:46:58

Just recently got into D3 again, after almost 2 years of a break. My God has this game changed. So many fun weapons like Vengeful Wind and others! I can handle molten, desecrator and even arcane beams just fine, even stacked on top of each other. However the biggest risk is spike damage which can come from dead molten elite's exploding, or certain enemies, like the mallet enemy and some bezerkers with their club hammers. - Near Death Experience is a wash. I've lost hardcore monks where I shouldn't and it seem it's buggy and doesn't proc. No to mention the 90second cooldown is a joke, should I happen to get "spiked" twice. I need a permanent dampen to spike damage, not a single use per 90 seconds one. - I run dash to avoid molten explosions but for enemies I run mantra of healing Time of Need, which gives me 30% damage reduction when under 50%. Seems to work fine. - I'm thinking of using a legendary gem of "Esoteric Alteration" or "Moratorium" to soften this spike damage, as I have great Life per Hit and other healing. I think Moratorium seems better. Any thoughts for a hardcore monk looking to grind greater rifts? Any set item, primals which help here? Currently doing Tier 15 greater rifts and slowly moving up, but again the spike damage and seeing my monk go from 100%->20% scares me. Should 2 spike damages occur in quick succession....

posted by /u/500239 in /r/Diablo3Monks on July 10, 2019 11:08:37

In one of today's /r/btc threads about Bitcoin Cash accepting Schnorr signatures before Bitcoin does Greg Maxwell(/u/nullc) does damage control with this comment: > [We're just uncomfortable moving forward with novel cryptography without it having been reviewed. **BCash is "yolo" cyptocurrency** which recently confiscated a large number of coins by accident in its last coercive split inducing rule change.]( The irony of course is that Greg Maxwell ACK'ed one of the biggest bugs in Bitcoin's history on a whim of Matt Corallo. He'd literally YOLO'd a bug into Bitcoin that allowed miners to create Bitcoin's out of thin air to save 600microseconds of validation time. With not so much as a basic unit test. Here's Greg Mawell's ACK to Matt Corallo's commit: And here's the full writeup oh how Greg Maxwell YOLO'd one of the most disastrous bugs into Bitcoin: BONUS: Greg lies about being contacted by another BCH developer and gets called out by that developer himself:

posted by /u/500239 in /r/btc on March 20, 2019 12:35:24

Just got a PM from an account created 1 month ago with this message: >from /u/RareTomatillo > sent 43 minutes ago >Hey man, i am Maya from China. I am currently a uni senior and i need to do an essay on the crypto market. So as I look around on /r/bitcoin, I found some of your posts which were extremely informative for me and my assignment. If possible, can I follow your twitter? I?d love to read more from you and i think your sources is very important for me to have a grade-A essay. Hope to hear from you soon. If you want to check who I am, please have a look on my profile at Thanks!P/s: I access Twitter Reddit via VPN and the speed sucks so I would be grateful if you are kind enough to send me your Twitter link. (Searching username crash all the time with my Internet) >permalink deletereportblock usermark unreadreply Besides account /u/RareTomatillo another user has confirmed that account /u/QuirkyProtection0 has sent them an identical message except that it changes the subreddit based on your last post as their's was: > Greetings! I am Maya, im from China and i just come to US doing internship for a corp in the crypto business. My colleague introduced me to Reddit and Twitter to read what you guys share and comment about crypto. Anyway, i came across your comments on /r/cryptocurrency and it was very informative. I wanna know about the market here in the US so can i have your twitter to follow what you read or share? Thankss in advance! Here?s my Twitter if you wanna check: Why are they trying to collect Twitter accounts via these bots? Can anyone else confirm they're also getting the same?

posted by /u/500239 in /r/btc on December 5, 2018 16:15:28

I just started dabbling with unRaid 2-3 weeks and I have to say unRaid is pretty awesome and easy to setup. Once the trial expires I'll definitely be purchasing a license as I've got a working setup and happy with it. Unraid has made setting up a self hosted server so easy with Docker and by following 'SpaceInvaderOne's' videos. I've setup LetsEncrypt, Nextcloud, and some samba shares. I do however have a few questions: 1) My disk setup is 4 disks + 1 parity disk + cache drive(ssd). The issue that I have is that for each disk I set them to never spin down, for each disk as well as the default general option. Issue is that they still keep spinning down. If I use Nextcloud, or Samba and I haven't accessed my unRaid server then I get a long pause and I hear the disk spinning up. I've tried all options including 9 hours spin down, but it seems to ignore even that and spin down after ~30minutes.. What gives? 2) Following SpaceInvaderOnes [tutorial on setting up a reverse proxy went well]( I have bought my own domain name and it works, but with one glitch. So https is set to default as per that video, but when accessing my nextcloud instance ie it sort of works. On a computer browser that has never used that domain the first time I must type 'https://' before the domain name otherwise the connection fails. However anytime after I just type '' and it goes to https no issue. How do I fix this one time hiccup?

posted by /u/500239 in /r/unRAID on November 23, 2018 11:09:10

I love Factorio, the game is worth every penny and then some, but I think we can agree the end game... falls short. When you ask others what do I do next, the propositions are usually: - Build megabases - test builds, setups - play with train/bot networks - mods, mods and mods - achievements - run a server/play with friends All of these are more like sandbox play, which we can already do at any time not needing to reach the endgame. No one forces you to launch that rocket in the first place. I think the developers as well as the users have fooled themselves into thinking the game should be about a single event of launching that rocket. Another Sim City 2000. Hell when asked what do I do next, the answer thus becomes... Launch more rockets we now have infinite science as introduced in 0.16. *Bleh.* I think this is narrow vision for Factorio and short sighted for what could be an even deeper game. What if Factorio is not meant about gathering/processing/producing/consuming and figuring out production bottlenecks but... about ~~building~~ automating **'The Factory'** itself. Bear with me: The game flow is as follows: 1) Mine ores by hand with a pick. --> Create miners to do the mining for you. 2) Build factories by hand. --> Slap down blueprints and let bots build it for you. 3) Constantly hunt for new ore patches. --> research a high level of 'Mining productivity' to essentially create endless ores. Which leads me to this old Factorio master piece called "Grey Goo": It's a self expanding factory that follows some internal logic and rules to expand and eat resources as it finds them. What if Factorio's endgame is to automate automation?

posted by /u/500239 in /r/factorio on August 27, 2018 16:05:26

yup even /u/bit_igu learned BCH has more volume than Lightning

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 3, 2020 17:25:23

Lol just your ln channel partners

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 3, 2020 10:17:29

thank you. No one ever seems to mention the cons of running the latest software on aging hardware. Even iPads will lag and stutter... but.. but number go up!

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on July 2, 2020 20:59:51

I'm saying Bitcoin is just a speculators toy right now and will never be used for paying with, that's the difference due to it's multipronged problems. It has no use case as cash.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 18:46:41

The majority buy Bitcoin and keep it on Coinbase, so that's representative of Bitcoin's usecase.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 17:55:04

I need to catch up on my Chinese and buy another Macbook.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 17:53:49

yeah that one is insane to me. Not blocks but a few miles. I know a person who goes out of their way for a few more cents, but makes good dollar. In that case I'd argue time > few cents on gas. I think troll /u/rattie_ok brought up a good point for once. Nano may be free, BCH might be pennies, but when you're a magnitude off like BTC is, it's not even in the same class of competition. The concept is that fees must be negligible, not necessarily free, as well as the aspect of utility/convienience. People will buy stuff with credit cards knowing the store raises prices to make up for their fees, rather than use cash because they're also paying for convenience. Bitcoin has neither convenience, negligible fees or reliability.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 16:43:54

*ExTeNsIoN BlOcKS* *cracks knuckles* *cracks knuckles* *cracks knuckles*

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 16:43:07

It can, but not great. hardware functions will always be magnitudes faster than software implementations that's the only difference. I don't think that CPU had hardware AES support or was outdated, as when I opened several tabs of reddit to let them load on this older PC, the VPN connection would cut out often. Could also been PIA's fault as well.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on July 2, 2020 16:18:21

So Bitcoin pivoted from p2p cash to settlement layer and apparently it's still Bitcoin... despite the whitepaper saying "peer to peer electronic cash". If Bitcoin pivots to a collectors coin with 0 ability to transact... it's still Bitcoin? It's like Ship of Theseus except with the boat being replaced with concrete and loosing it's ability to float. Got it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 16:09:59

Nano is a valid competitor but paying 1 penny versus 0 pennies is not a game breaker. Paying 1 dollar, 5 dollars, 35 dollars as planned by Bitcoin Core's scaling path versus 1 penny is a game breaker.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 16:07:52

Hold on. I got this. *cracks knuckles* *ExTeNsIoN BlOcKS* *I kNoW hOW SeGwIt WoRkS*

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 16:05:17

You sure you don't want to argue that LN has more usage than BCH? > ok you won Mr. 0.08 TPS ;) or you prefer to be called Mr. 0.024% ? Whatever you say about BCH's usage, makes LN look 10x worse by comparison so that's cool. It's abundantly clear BCH has more adoption than LN does. I mean go for it. You have the clear advantage as LN is private and you can claim any amount of volume that you want. All you have to say is that the $8million locked into LN is traded back and forth 10x each day by everyone and LN is getting 10,0,123,4,23,21TPS.... but we can't really know because it's private.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 15:47:13

No uses LN to trade between exchanges because none of the major ones support it 😂 8mil vs 100mil *LiQuIdItY* My guess is that you're next argument is that the 8mil locked in on LN is traded 10 times each day to get to 80mil. But by all means go ahead and cite whatever source you want for how much volume is seen on BCH everyday. Pick any source you want, but I can bet it's higher than 8mil😂

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 15:34:58

No kidding. One moment we're talking about backlog with blocks, next you bring up L2. Why? Who knows, probably to avoid addressing the 114 block backlog😂

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 15:33:10

Again it might depend on the CPU but I just gave you an example where older CPU's don't scale because newer CPU's have hardware implementions of codecs and encryptions where older CPU's must do so via software. Sure you can browse web, but I just gave you an example where my older HP elitebook top of the line was not able to keep up software decrypting AES from my VPN software and was dropping the connection as a result. I do agree that PC's in general scale better than mobile devices for sure because they're packing more juice. However the same is not as true for Android's/iOS devices. I'm sure no one doubts an iOS device is smooth and polish and doesn't even stutter, but have you ever picked up a 5 year old iPad on the newest iOS???? It janks and stutters like an Android from 2010.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on July 2, 2020 15:29:24

So Android + tinkering around is more secure than iOS. Got it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on July 2, 2020 15:23:36

you went from talking about Liquidity, getting shown up with basic links 8mil vs 100mil lol and now you fall back to the 2014 FUD of price. Cool beans.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 15:22:41

You have a lot to learn when /u/contrarian__ is schooling you on basic SegWit knowledge When you ask questions like this: > Ask yourself, what if legacy nodes receive blocks directly from a miner...? That's when I know you're clueless. Mining nodes and non-mining nodes send the same format to other nodes. Only difference is mining nodes can occasionally create some blocks when they find that nonce, but the software for mining and non-mining nodes is the same software and version. I mean go ahead and show me where you can download 2 sets of node software for Bitcoin Core lol. I'm sure you'll give me a link and not some smartass reply. I'll wait.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 15:19:05

not to mention governments waste so much money and are probably paying 10x market value "for customization's" from a reputable security company. I've seen some price estimates thrown around for renewing their fleet of toughbooks and it makes Apple look like the poorboy manufacturer.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on July 2, 2020 15:16:11

lol wut. You're clueless. If anything the government is paying some contractor 10x the market price and getting top of the line hardware as well, at least for the time.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on July 2, 2020 15:15:24

Yeah well that's things a beast. My laptop although from the premium HP line of products is a dual core and not that particularly fast. Did the HDD for SSD swap but ultimately I had basic programs like VPNs constantly drop connections as I assume it was missing hardware AES or something and the dual core wasn't enough to run a VPN and browser of chrome with several tabs. RAM and HDD was not the bottleneck but the CPU.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on July 2, 2020 15:14:26

> My ten year old $350 Dell laptop that I bought running Windows 7 is currently running Windows 10 v2004. Why can PCs do it, but not phones? Jesus. How slow is the laptop? I have an HP Elitebook from 2010 and sure it can run Windows 10, but it's not a great time at all and it was a top of the line product when it was released. Thinking of installing Ubuntu/Xunbuntu on it so it can play music/media in my basement gym, but that's all it's good for at this point. Also what's with the recent trend of everyone needing to run the latest software on their Android/iPhone/Windows? Yeah you get all the latest features, emojis and security updates but new software is more taxing on unchanging hardware. Have you ever used a 5 year old device with the latest updates? even a 5 year old iPad lags and stutters with Safari or homescreen. Applies to all older hardware. I'll take responsive and snappy over latest emoji's any day of the week.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on July 2, 2020 14:52:12

It's also confirmed that the US government uses Android phones over iOS as well.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on July 2, 2020 14:45:49

lol nice side step. Your 1st response is saying blocksize isn't dynamic and second response is about Layer 2.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 14:42:09

so it's mandatory, thanks for proving my point. > and yet SegWit is not optional but mandatory once activated. - /u/500239

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 14:27:25

Even better question: Remember the trolls going around with some website called or something? It recommended BCH to use something like 150 confirmations for best practices. Where are these trolls now and how come no one in the industry uses that website for reference lol

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 14:12:11

You'd be stupid to hold either BTC or BCH past the last bull run. But sure you can go around telling people you only lost 50% as a selling point too lol > BTC is for saving.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 14:10:08

We see it occur everyday. Merchants ask customers to pay with cash or Visa over American Express because the fees are lower.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 14:09:12

I too bold words when I laugh.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 14:03:08

so a few weeks ago when it took 114+ blocks there wasn't a backlog either?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 14:02:45

Better make some tea, the kettle is boiling hot! Bold some more words to express your emotions.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 14:01:44

which means miners must chose one of the 3 options above. Checkmate.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 13:55:23

It is mandatory, otherwise you're making objectively less money than other miners and will be pushed out of the game sooner than miners playing by SegWit rules. I see you started bolding words again lol. Did the kettle come to a boil yet?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 13:55:01

rofl that's your proof OK. Every device these days is backdoored, Apple, Android, Microsoft, Alexa, etc. Common knowledge. Everyone knows Bitmain sells out every generation of miners, since they make the best ones. Yeah that's clearly insider knowledge and therefore I must work there. /s I thought you were supposed to be a smart person or something. thanks for making my day. I can see I hit a nerve when I called you out for lying this week. Have you started hooked on phonics yet? **edit:** /u/nullc I also forgot to mention I work part time at Apple as well. I know you won't believe me, so I'll spill some intimate familiarity with Apple's next release... they plan to name the next iPhone the "iPhone Twelve".

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 13:53:35

> I'm not lying. The mempool clears very regularly. Clears regularly every few days or hours, not 10 minutes. That's called a backlog. Stop twisting words lol.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 13:33:36

> If you repeat that bit of defamation over and over again it might sucker a few more victims into believing it, but it won't make it any more true. like you claiming I work for Bitmain, but when asked for proof you never provide any?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 13:32:27

> Having practically no penalty for years seems totally fair to call something optional. When you have to say practically you're moving goalposts. The fact is there's a penalty now and mining is a very competitive business where every % counts.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 13:31:15

> It's quite literally optional. Fees are still miniscule compared to coinbase rewards (something like 4% of the total), and there are still plenty of legacy transactions to add to a block, so it's not like they're going to lose anything significant any time soon. You should add "for now" with a big asterisk. Is the long term goal of Bitcoin to replace the coinbase reward with transaction fees? Yes it is In that case a miner that doesn't follow SegWit rules leaves 50% of money on the table and will be pushed out the game by miners making double his income.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 13:24:51

> "A miner" has voluntarily opted to support segwit. Is this not true? You tell me. If SegWit is voluntary and not mandatory, what options do they have? I see these options for a miner: - Follow SegWit's mandatory rules - Ignore SegWit's mandatory rules and get your blocks orphaned by processing them under previous rules. - Don't process SegWit transactions and leave money on the table making your mining farm less money and therefore less competitive.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 13:23:00

lol we knew some maps so well like Temple where we spammed proximity mines on all the spawn points. Then it was a gamble, because whoever died next, died several more times. God what a great time for it's time.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/gaming on July 2, 2020 13:18:44

Utility speaks for itself. I'd like to pay more in fees whenever possible, said nobody ever. Where Bitcoin looks to strip itself of utility Bitcoin Cash looks to add more.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 13:16:58

> It isn't backlogged. 14 blocks to clear the mempool right now. Why do you lie? Some poor saps are going to wait 2.5 hours to get confirmed, not 10 minutes.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 13:14:27

> They don't have to accept any txes that spend P2SH UTXOs or they could specifically filter P2SH-wrapped SegWit txes if they wanted. Or they could mine empty blocks. So, no, technically, it wasn't a requirement to upgrade. lol and leave money on the table and therefore be less competitive financially until they get pushed out of the game with miners taking money they cannot. Cool. Sounds very optional indeed.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 13:13:14

You know the old triangle diagram, fast, cheap, reliable. For Bitcoin transactions you now pick 2. When arguing with a troll they always mention 2 of the 3 properties and dance around the 3rd as their argument.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 13:11:29

lets go back and handle one argument at a time, because you're gish gallopping. You said: > Segwit was and still is an optional upgrade. and yet SegWit is not optional but mandatory once activated. A miner MUST treat some p2sh transactions under SegWit rules otherwise their block will be orphaned. Is this not true?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 13:02:35

lol what a response. Freedom of choice is not using SegWit and not gaining on the blocksize increase. That explains why Bitcoin blocks have gained 0.1MB-0.5MB in size despite the Bitcoin network being backlogged. > A miner who doesn't upgrade their node and treats SegWit transactions as pay to anyone will have their block orphaned and receive no mining reward. This is 100% true. and your response is: some nodes don't even understand SegWit. lolwut. /u/beardecake is that you with your poor logic?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 12:50:49

Imagine selling a scaling solution that's objectively worse than the original. Bitcoin going to Lightning gained all these issues: - Cannot send money to someone that's offline - Are capped by the network capacity limits, currently around $1k - your money is permanently in a hotwallet and you must periodically check in. - LN devs are working on supporting 3rd party watchtowers to make up for the objectively worse security of Lightning - If Bitcoin is congested, which it usually is, there are race conditions where you can lose money by having the attacker beat you to an onchain commit. - Closing your LN account requires the cooperation of your channel partner, otherwise you must wait out a time limit. - LN merchants cannot receive more money than they have funded on their side of the channel. An LN merchant must periodically keep topping off their side of the channel just to be able to receive more funds. - More to come soon (TM)

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 12:47:43

> who went out for testing on the mainnet in 2018 and have more economic activity, more development and more liquidity than BCH. How do you count LN transactions when it's apparently private lol. trolls use this fact both ways. Also false on the Liquidity. Lightning has current 965 BTC locked in or about $8million dollars locked in. Meanwhile BCH sees about 10x day on any day.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 12:34:38

SegWit is only a blocksize increase if SegWit is used. You don't seem to get that. If a block contains 0% SegWit transactions there is no blocksize increase.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 12:31:14

No one's arguing SegWit wasn't a blocksize increase, just a shitty one. On average the Bitcoin blockchain has gained 0.1to 0.5MB in blocksize. it's dependant on people using SegWit over legacy transactions, which is a problem not a feature. > Mandatory updates by a centralized group are the problem. They aren't a feature of a decentralized protocol. This is a non-sequitor. Once SegWit was activated it was a mandatory update. A miner who treated SegWit transactions classic pay to anyone legacy transactions would have their block orphaned. Once SegWit updated it was mandatory to treat SegWit transactions under new rules. > They require people to upgrade their wallets & fullnode software, should they wish to do so. They must do so in fact. A miner who doesn't upgrade their node and treats SegWit transactions as pay to anyone will have their block orphaned and receive no mining reward. > It just forces changes to the protocol on people with no freedom of choice. It forces the consequences of the vastly increased blocksize onto users too. You don't appear to know how any of this works. Once SegWit was activated there was no freedom of choice. A miner who treated SegWit transactions classic pay to anyone legacy transactions would have their block orphaned. Only users had choice to use or not use SegWit. And when a user doesn't use SegWit everyone suffers, since it affects Bitcoin's throughput. Should a block contain 100% SegWit transactions it fits more transactions and the blockchain processes faster. Should a block contain 0% SegWit transactions it effectively has no blocksize increase and has less throughput.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 12:28:07

You don't make any sense. SegWit and legacy transactions take up the same space on disk. In the case of SegWit they don't count signatures toward blocksize but it still takes up the same space on disk. Signatures aren't discarded, just not counted towards the disk space.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 12:16:37

wait this is how you segue to trolling? cool. Let me know when LN matches feature parity to BCH. Something tells me it never will.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 12:10:09

So yes it's been in development far longer than BCH, but launched 1 year later than BCH. I stand corrected.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 11:48:37

> How do you think this group of individuals is gaming the system exactly? By giving SegWit transactions an unfair 25% discount despite taking up the same space on disk. > FYI, Segwit was a blocksize increase for those that chose to utilize it. That's how native Segwit transactions save 37.6% over legacy for the average transaction. Thats how the discount is achieved, the exact same way that bch does it, only the bch way was mandatory, not optional. And why do SegWit transactions get a discount despite taking up the same disk space as legacy transactions? Because they don't count signatures towards blocksize... despite taking up THE SAME blocksize in terms of diskspace. > And you won't get 100% adoption immediately since it's not mandatory like with bch upgrades. Why are you framing a problem as a feature? SegWit requires users to know about SegWit and understand it so the entire Bitcoin blockchain benefits, hence the poor adoption. BCH blocksize increases puts no burden to understand the technology and just works.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 11:36:23

Are... you high? LN has been in development for 6 years now, BCH just under 4 years. LN mainnet launched long before BCH did as well.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 11:30:31

lol soon. Been 6 years and LN network has stagnated.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 11:23:20

> Most of the moderators in this group is actually employed by Roger Ver. do you have a source for this or do you just spread misinformation?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 11:22:34

so when can we expect Lightning to match feature parity with onchain Bitcoin? Been 6 years so far and Lightning developers still warn not to put more money into Lightning that you can't afford to lose. Another 6 years? > We do tradeoffs in layer two, because we don't want to do them on layer 1. That makes no sense. For example in Layer 2 you cannot send money to people who are offline. There was no such tradeoff in Layer 1. Ln creates 2 new problems for everyone one it hopes to solve. This is why 6 years in LN is still far from ready.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 11:22:05

Might as well if Bitcoin Core is gaming the system with it's accounting hacks for SegWit. For those that didn't know SegWit transactions and legacy transactions take up the same amount of disk space. Yet for some reason they give SegWit transactions a 25% discount. Despite that incentive, after 5 years Segwit usage finally hit 50% usage, BitPay finally started using it, while other major exchanges like Binance still don't support it. Who would have thought the technical debt brought on by SegWit would need an incentive lol.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 10:29:36

> So...what happens when a few of the miners have decided mining BCH isn't really worth it? They leave money on the table for others to take. Are you clueless about incentives?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 09:22:38

It's not new but it's also not the last time we'll hear of a Lightning attack surface. For every issue Lightning solves, it creates 2 more. Lightning's security is objectively worse than onchain Bitcoin. Which is why Lightning dev's are building support for 3rd party watchtower services where you can subscribe and pay them to watch over your funds. The whole point of Bitcoin was to NOT rely on 3rd party services to watch over your funds so Lightning has already failed at being p2p cash. Had you done your research, which you always advocate, but never do yourself you'd see on page 1 in the Bitcoin whitepaper it clearly says: > What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, **allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party**

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 08:46:48

That's why I told Maxwell to read slow. He'll take a joke seriously so long as he can sow discord and lies.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 08:08:24

not since Blockstream decided to lay your off for "unknown reasons".

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 08:07:43

you already get a paycheck. You go around telling people to research and that Bitcoin ISN't Peer to peer electronic cash, when that's literally the title of the whitepaper lol. The only sources you read are Blockstream approved ones lol

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 08:06:57

> I encourage you and everyone else to do more of that - it's part of "do your own research". Wait. hold on. But you never do your own research. This month alone we confirmed: - you never read the whitepaper - you don't know or couldn't find the source that Maxwell was referencing when he said Bitcoin can't work. - you say Bitcoin ISN'T peer to peer cash... when that's literally the title of the whitepaper lol so what research have you ever done.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 08:05:44

> Holding Bitcoin is using it. holding beanie babies was using them too. But at least you could snuggle up to them while holding them.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 07:58:01

wtf are you talking about lol. Show me what I gave anything up. source or gtfo Greg's brigading team.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 2, 2020 07:57:30

thanks for the tip and highlights of recent event in contrast to fox/cnn?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/media_criticism on July 1, 2020 21:34:47

> Segwit was created in a time where people thought a blocksize increase was necessary, so it gave one, in a backwards compatible manner. Because it's only a blocksize increase if everyone uses SegWit. It's a blocksize increase with strings attached. Depending on which Bitcoin Core and Blockstream trolls you talk to, they will tell you SegWit gives anywhere from 2MB-4MB blocksize increase and yet SegWit usage is around 40-50% and at best we're seeing 1.1MB -1.5MB blocks despite Bitcoin being nearly always backlogged. When halving hit, the biggest blocks we saw were 1.5MB: Meanwhile a 2MB blocksize increase via regular blocksize upgrades would given 2MB right away with no strings attached and actually increase Bitcoin's throughput or place any burden on users to know to use SegWit. > The top-rated sibling comment of yours says that this prevents any further blocksize increase. How? The fact that segwit segregated the witness and put it where old nodes couldn't find it doesn't disable the ability to make any hard fork in the future. Not due to SegWit but because Blockstream/Bitcoin Core have shown openly that they will fight tooth and nail to prevent a normal blocksize increase. They talk about consensus but they've kicked out every last Bitcoin Core developer who was pro bigger blocks and censored the 2 main channels were consensus would be discussed about blocksize. Even today even mentioning a discussion around blocksize gets you an instant ban. How can you reach consensus when you can't even start a conversation? The reason Blockstream pushed so hard for SegWit is so they could claim a blocksize increase, while not actually giving one, knowing that for a blocksize increase to happen 100% of blocksize transactions would need to be SegWit transactions. Their product Liquid has no market if Bitcoin isn't clogged. It's a clear conflict of interest. After 5 years SegWit tx usage is closer to 40-50% ie, **Bitcoin got a 0.1-0.5MB blocksize increase.** Sources:

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 21:14:34

again try reading slower and not cherry picking xD Can I recommend hooked on phonics?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 17:15:25

I love it when you twist words. Your own source doesn't say CEO of BCH. Maybe try reading slower.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 16:51:23

Greg Maxwell is already busy spreading that lie. He's a great guy like that.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 16:18:59

Do you own research son. For once in your life. In the last month month I've learned the following about your "research": - you never read the Bitcoin whitepaper - you never bothered to confirm what source Maxwell was referencing when he said Bitcoin can't work - and you don't do any research on your own as Blockstream feeds you misinformation.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 15:47:50

> Please tell me what rule "Bitcoin Core" broke. The p2p cash function of Bitcoin. I remember before Blockstream when this image used to be true: For 1 penny, you got confirmed in the next block or worst case 2 blocks 99% garuanteed. Now just traders speculating create enough volume to raise fees to whole dollars and confirmation to days.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 15:34:22

Them changing Bitcoin from p2p cash to settlement layer is the scam, while breaking rule #2 from that slide.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 15:11:31

Where do you believe I'm fundamentally wrong? Lets start by debunking your claims one by one.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 15:05:06

As usual you exaggerate. A monopoly on mining by patenting asicboost? OK Why are you deceitful?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 14:35:01

I imagine Bitcoin investors in a few years will have the same reaction. They will go to actually spend their Bitcoin only to realize that transacting with Bitcoin is more expensive than existing cash methods and credit cards and this *"Bitcoin: Peer to Peer Electronic Cash"* cannot compete with today's current money systems. Then some Blockstream fanboy will tell them, no, no no, no Satoshi got it wrong, it's actually a settlement coin, "Holding Bitcoin IS using Bitcoin" lol.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 13:52:02

The Blockstream model is halt Bitcoin's scaling while allowing Liquid to sell all the features Bitcoin is missing. Should Bitcoin ever get a blocksize increase to handle spikes in volume Liquid then has no reason to exist.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 13:16:01

Asicboost is a software improvement that makes Bitcoin miners more efficient with electricity. Each generation of ASIC miners Bitmain produces is more efficient than the last via hardware or software. Greg Maxwell's complaint from what I can understand in his mailing list is that Bitmain discovered the optimization and not Blockstream. He has no problems with hardware optimizations, just software ones because apparently more efficient ASIC miners area threat to Bitcoin... Go figure.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 13:03:04

wow /u/vegarde is -1493 in karma, says Bitcoin is not peer to peer cash, when it's the title of the Bitcoin whitepaper and believes the p2p cash will come when Lightning is ready.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 12:58:19

Not out of context. You yourself said this week, Bitcoin was never peer to peer cash. The creator of these slides and yourself have bought into Blockstream's idea that Bitcoin shouldn't be used as cash. Hence the "Spending Bitcoin is a scam" narrative you're pushing.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 12:57:09

Are you high? Where did I admit I work for Bitmain? I'm sure you'll link a credible source /s Man I must have triggered you when you got called out for brigading.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 12:50:57

I'm affiliated with Bitmain? That's news to me. I think you lying is inappropriate but then again you have a clear history of it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 12:46:21

Satoshi would especially cringe at people who are still following Blockstream's 5 year old FUD, when BCH proved them wrong at every step so far. It's probably why they invented the Bcash term before BCH was born, knowing what was to come.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 11:41:41

hey can you tell me why you think the actions of a single merchant make an entire blockchain a scam? Not to mention the entire "Bcash" relabeling occurring before BCH was even created? I'm trying to wrap my head around this twisted logic of yours. Is this a Blockstream belief you're parroting?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 10:58:43

Satoshi was about Bitcoin: Peer to Peer Electronic Cash. Bitcoin is a settlement layer now Some brain washed folk like /u/vegarde believe Bitcoin was never peer to peer electronic cash.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 10:06:35

This game's code is just rotting from the inside.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on July 1, 2020 09:21:20

> You are welcome to succeed, but not by telling fairytailes and tricking people into buying your coin, pretending that it is the real bitcoin. That was Roger Ver a single merchant who tried that. Can you explain how 1 merchant can invalidate an entire blockchain? By your own stupid logic if Adam Back was selling Liquid as the real Bitcoin you would be calling Bitcoin the scam. Are you really this brainwashed by Blockstream?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 09:19:48

you have a conscience? bullshit Last time we talked you told me Bitcoin was never p2p electronic cash... probably because you never read the title of the Bitcoin whitepaper rofl. I'd say you have no intelligence.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 08:45:58

I too remember you attacking any big block supporter. When Bitmain officially started supporting big blocks that's when you put a target on their back. You're the biggest liar I've seen in a long time.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 08:34:51

- bragging rights - rough judgement of how experienced the other guys are

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on July 1, 2020 08:13:49

You've never seen fighters in the audience? Go watch some sports son.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 08:08:20

scale Liquid by moving all traffic onto Liquid.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on July 1, 2020 08:07:47

oh man that aged Blockstream FUD is really good with red wine.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 17:13:37

> me I bought when it was on the moon that's why I'm here trolling. Oh didn't mean to rub it in, sorry. Crypto has a clear history of periodic bubbles every 3-4 years. It's not rocket science to figure that out, so I recommend you do some researching. Been through 3 bubbles so far and all that's required is hodling, no day trading required. Load up when the whole market is down, sell when every top 25 coin is doing multiples. Most trolls around here fall back to the retarded argument or comparing ATH prices to current, ignoring that anyone with half a brain would sell when their coin does multiples. Even if you'd had missed the top you still could sell months later and come out on top. Buying BCH at 300/400 at the fork and selling at $3.5 is nice, but selling 3 months later at $1k+ is still money too. Trolls just bring up the ratio's ignoring that when it's bubble time again, BCH will be back at $3k and some easily being the best returns of the top 25 coins.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 16:17:23

he's playing the tire out game. Breaks up the conversation into a million little pieces instead of just answering the question in hopes that you just give up.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 16:13:21

lol for like half the clip too. I'd be embarrassed to post this clip as an "excuse" this his first win this year was taken due to a planned maintenance patch. The whole clip is a shit show including: - One friend crouch locked the entire clip lol - OP firing metal where the solo player long left. - Then OP switching to firing on his friends wood builds for good measure lol in the opposite direction. Talk about panicking. - OP then firing all over the builds, instead of just removing 2 metal builds at the base. - And the cherry on top, Mr-Crouch-lock finally gets up to pickaxe a build that's long been abandoned and is surprised to see it not fall apart rofl It's like watching some bugs bunny cartoon.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 30, 2020 16:11:52

lol what is this, Blockstream FUD from 2011? Do I open the red or white wine with this classic trolling? You buy crypto during the bear market and sell during the bull run when every altcoin is doing 10x and your xbox friends are talking crypto. I assumed even trolls like you knew this. Been through 3 bubbles so far and I'm doing great. You.. You.. didn't sell all your crypto during the November/December 2017 mania? Oh boy.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 16:06:45

is diskspace measured in bytes or weight? I never got that answer from you. You just kept derailing the comment with personal attacks... like you're doing now. Do I need to call Western Digital to confirm?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 15:49:35

I remember the same line used by trolls when Ethereum was 3 years old. Good times, great money made.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 15:48:27

Bitcoin Core had a scaling plan? That's news to me. The 18 months deadline getting kicked around for the last 6 years was self evident it was never going to happen. For each issue LN solved it created 2 new ones. Still can't send money to people offline, still are capped with balances of under $1k, still must check in periodically, ie perma hot wallet, etc. I always understood that LN was forever 18 months away from completion, while Blockstream tried coaxing users into using Liquid which solved all of Bitcoins problems yesterday. Hell even Adam Back positioned Liquid before Lightning: To this day even their most active cheerleader /u/vegarde can't give a deadline for when Lightning would reach feature parity with Bitcoin's p2p cash function that existed prior to Blockstream's influence.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 15:46:39

yeah like when he got 5+ accounts which were inactive for a few days to jump on my 50 comment deep thread once Greg made a bet. I made a thread about it. *Within 1 hour all 5 accounts had "witnessed" the bet despite being inactive for days prior.* He has a history of vandalizing and sockpuppeting wikipedia and continues it to this day.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 15:42:19

Is diskspace measured in bytes or weights? I'll let you know after the conference call with Western Digital to see what unit's they're still using in 2020.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 15:33:57

> this is a space issue for full node miners that have to store an unknown quantity of information that is hidden from view by accounting tricks Not to mention both SegWit and legacy transactions take the same diskspace. That's what Maxwell is dancing around. But yet they discount the signature portion for SegWit transactions to create incentive for using SegWit over legacy despite bloating the blockchain just the same. Accounting hacks ftw.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 15:32:44

> You no longer take fall damage from Ziplines when landing in shallow water. lol how many times has this been "fixed". Waiting for someone to post dying to shallow water this week.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 30, 2020 14:34:56

You might say Liquid 51% itself with no attackers xD They didn't notify those affected, knew about the issue for 18 months and despite no longer working for Blockstream, even Greg Maxwell is doing damage control rather than admitting they were irresponsible with user funds!

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 14:17:48

> That's your narrative. That's the narrative. How can you reach consensus on a topic when you're not even allowed to discuss it? You can't. > But it's been three years, where's the metric showing data that you had more support? Before the mass censoring of the BitcoinTalk forums and /r/bitcoin Bitcoin XT had majority signalling. Way before Segwit even breached 50%

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 13:22:38

I think you're being evasive after being caught in another lie. Don't get upset when you get called out for lies, I know in /r/bitcoin you're used to it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 12:52:01

> I mean they were spraying hard and the other guy was holding his own So hard /u/7w4rcr4ft7 was spraying his own buddy's wood wall for half the clip xD. 2nd guy was crouch locked and 3rd guy started pickaxing the metal builds AFTER the solo guy left 2 days ago.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 30, 2020 12:49:23

> Everything in my post is accurate and clearly stated. Were it not, you would be easily able to point out what part wasn't I just did and you dipped since. A soft fork too can allow Adam Back to take 50% of your Bitcoins.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 12:46:42

> I "came along" long before you ever heard of Bitcoin. And since then we've called you out on so many lies and half truths, that you ended up proactively deleting your own comments knowing we'd call you out: Tell me again why a soft fork won't allow Adam Back 50% of any Bitcoin transaction rofl. That's the new line for this week.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 12:45:55

> Not so. Softforks only permit behaviour that was already permitted, they only add restrictions. A restriction could be that half of every transaction goes to Adam Back via soft fork. It's that simple.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 11:23:28

> Hardforks can change anything. And so can soft forks. Don't be deceitful Greg. Softforks could decide that half of any coinbase reward goes to Adam Back CEO of Blockstream.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 11:16:56

SegWit and legacy tx's take up the same diskspace in the blockchain. Yet to get an actually blocksize with SegWit all the transactions in the block need to be SegWit, while a legacy transaction with a blocksize increase doesn't care what format others use. In short: A blocksize increase is a blocksize increase right away with no games. A SegWit equivalent blocksize increase requires that every other transaction in that block is also SegWit so all the signatures aren't counted towards the blocksize. Also not to mention despite taking the same diskspace (legacy tx's and segwit tx's) SegWit transactions get an accounting hack of 25% of, since they don't officially count the signature size towards the transaction... despite it still existing and taking up the same space as a legacy transaction. It's a joke.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 11:11:17

My bet was on the 1 guy on winning. You guys were spraying his structures all over the place with no ability to control him. 3 guys couldn't bring him down and he just kept going. Downtime definitely saved you a loss, not him.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 30, 2020 10:59:31

Liquid just 51% itself. Let me hear you write on your famous grandma purse stealing stories. This time you don't have to delete it

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 09:53:31

Totally. Remember when Greg Maxwell jumped on the chance to spin made up stories about BCH before deleting them: But when his own creation has an issue due to poor design, he says "Yes Liquid allowed theft for X time, but that's it". Karma is a bitch indeed. Probably why he left Liquid as he saw the writing on the wall with such a failed product. Has Blockstream made any ROI for it's investors yet? Are hat sales up this year?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 09:21:31

As ex CTO of Blockstream did you leave knowing this bug existed?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 09:15:45

Just 2 subs /r/bitcoin and /r/cryptocurrency. Nice projection mate. Coincidentally both of these 2 subs had their mods replaced by a completely different new set a few years ago after the original mods had their accounts mysteriously hacked. /r/monero loves BCH's as does /r/Ethereum /r/ethfinance etc. Also probably the only 2 subs that don't use Blockstream's "Bcash" slang since they're not bought.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 30, 2020 09:12:58

rockets reflect damage back onto the rocket not the battleship that launched it. I think mirror only reflects direct damage like from a laser back onto only that ship that caused the damage. Ie Mirror is a useless mod.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 30, 2020 08:55:06

lol and then you upgrade EMP 1 level too high and consequently any future matches are a 50/50 flip with getting battleships one level above you and 3 shards becomes the norm... Why did I upgrade EMP to 10????

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 30, 2020 08:53:09

if battle ship #1 hits your mirror shield, does his damage reflect to himself only, or to everyone?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 30, 2020 08:51:30

more like censored and censored and it kept popping up like a pimple that wouldn't go away.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 20:34:16

You were the one that told me Bitcoin isn't p2p cash and that it's currently being built. Then you ask how Blockstream affected Bitcoin as peer to peer electronic cash, while looking at the whitepaper's title lol. The cognitive dissonance is real.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 17:34:57

Now I understand why you don't believe Bitcoin is peer to peer electronic cash. You believed Maxwell's vision for Bitcoin, never verified the sources or proofs he referred to and just ran with it. It's funny how you always tell people to verify when you admitted this week that you sure didn't verify yourself.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 17:27:18

Ergo p2p cash is broken on Bitcoin since Blockstream's roadmap was implemented. See that was easy.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 16:08:25

I love when you ask questions and never answered mine. Note how you still haven't answered mine and propose your question instead. When is it planned for LN to match feature parity with Bitcoin?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 15:45:37

What a non answer. I love it when you act dumb, because dumb is all you have to offer. That's when I know you've been beat. We already found out you never verified Greg Maxwell's source for why Bitcoin fails as a decentralized solution. Yet you always tell people to verify yourself. Why didn't you verify his source? When is Lightning expected to work as well as Bitcoin did back in 2011 as p2p cash? when will offline sending work, ie someone who's been offline for months?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 15:19:51

> It's great! We're building this P2P cash system that has cheaper fees than ever, and that does not have the doublespend risk. It also scales much better. When do you plan to finish it? It's Lightning has been in the works for 6 years now and still isn't close to feature parity of the original Bitcoin. A better question is, will it ever reach feature parity as an offchain solution? So far the answer is no and looks to be a decoy while Blockstream sells their solution over Lightning.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 14:47:07

ever see the /r/cryptocurrency mod sticky and do damage control for any other coin bug thread? Nope? Oh yeah just for Blockstream projects.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 13:27:58

I haven't been keeping up with Bitcoin's dev work. Can you catch me up? Is Bitcoin still "peer to peer electronic cash" after adding Blockstream's SegWit invention? Or is Bitcoin no p2p cash anymore?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 13:26:46

Great. We have a Bitcoin working as Bitcoin did from 2011. How is Bitcoin: Peer to Peer electronic Cash working out on Bitcoin in 2020? Is the p2p cash function parity equivalent to Bitcoin from 2011? If not when do you plan to make it feature parity?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 12:48:44

Greg is doing damage control in /r/bitcoin saying yes there was a bug but there was no theft so it's OK. Completely dancing around the fact that Blockstream created this problem and did not fix it for 18 months. They're so deceitful to their own customers.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 10:36:18

What's worse it that their gun sometimes blocks pellets and makes it a coin toss. Reviewed a few kills last night where I knew I was hitting headshots on players and replay showed their gun blocked a lot of pellets making it do less damage than it should.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 29, 2020 10:31:04

> Satoshi didn't have Avalanche. Do you support it? Yes because it promotes Bitcoin as p2p cash. I support any change that promotes Bitcoin as p2p cash. Meanwhile Bitcoin has had many changes and it's no longer p2p cash as you said it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 10:29:12

So why didn't Blockstream and Bitcoin Core start their own project instead of twisting Bitcoin's peer to peer cash function into something else?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 10:27:08

> There is no single paper describing that The whitepaper written by Satoshi. If Bitcoin Core and Blockstream wanted to create something other than peer to peer electronic cash they should have started their own project instead of derailing Bitcoin.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 10:10:13

> it's an added value technology for use cases bitcoin isn't really well suited. Like peer to peer electronic cash?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 09:38:30

you never read the reasoning why Bitcoin scaling was pushed off chain? That's not satisfying at all. That tells me exactly what I expected, that you followed Maxwell's scaling plan without ever verifying it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 09:08:18

When will Lightning work as well as Bitcoin did? Is there a timeline for that?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 08:56:30

> Might not have read a paper as such, at least I can not find it now. I know which why I made it a point to find out. thank you for answering my question that you implicitly trust Blockstream without verifying the sources they used for offchain scaling. Greg Max well specifically referenced a paper proving why Bitcoin can't work. And you have no idea what paper that is.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 08:55:29

yeah it's quite possible. These Blockstream guys are known to be deceptive and manipulative and Maxwell was caught vandalizing and sockpuppeting wikipedia.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 29, 2020 08:14:43

Adam already making excuses.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 28, 2020 08:16:47

so link to it. I know for a fact you didn't read. Why do I always have to comment 20+ comments for you to link to something I know you didn't read? Link next comment or we know you never heard of it, let alone read it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 27, 2020 19:29:59

> after you first prove that a purely unchain scaling strategy won't lead to centralization. Maxwell's paper claims onchain scaling strategy leads to centralization. 1 source answers 2 questions.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 27, 2020 13:30:31

yes since that's the root of your argument and the reason for offchain scaling.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 27, 2020 13:13:19

no link, no source, just blind trust that Blockstream will do what's right. You're right there is no point debating a cult follower who can't point out sources for his beliefs.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 27, 2020 12:33:54

That's what I figured. You never looked up how Maxwell proved you can't scale onchain.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 27, 2020 11:56:50

I wish to discuss the root of the issue. Why are you stalling again? or have you never found Greg Maxwell's explanation for offchain scaling? That's my bet and so far the theme of our conversations. Prove me wrong, show me the sauce.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 27, 2020 11:24:28

It follows Greg Maxwell's vision of Bitcoin. Can you cite a source that proves Bitcoin can't scale on chain. Maxwell provided it apparently in year 1.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 27, 2020 10:41:55

I learn from my experiences as does everyone in this world. You've been sticking to Blockstream's grand plan. They said BTC can't scale while selling Liquid and you never once asked them for proof. Also I understand software and the development process and scaling much better than you. You're not a software developer.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 27, 2020 10:19:07

Same outcome. The user suffers for it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 26, 2020 20:46:27

That's a low of assumptions. Are any back with sources or just your interpretation? Just like last time you interpreted "hurting the economy" and couldn't cite or qualify a source to support your interpretation. This is why you get called out for misinformation and FUD. Don't get irate when someone asks you for a source and you instead call them a turd.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 20:45:49

eh neither seem like quality trolls to me. Given that Clarence used LoopNester as a sacrifice pretending to call out an obvious troll, while trolling in the same pattern is proof his regular methods were not gaining traction.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 17:50:05

Not only do you lie but now you're already backpeddling to another excuse. Satoshi clearly outlined the procedure for a blocksize increase AFTER this intial 1MB spam limit. You saying Satoshi saw an issue with blocksize issues and THEN proposed a way to increase blocksize confirms you're lying ROFL. > Satoshi discussed raising the blocksize AFTER he introduced the temporary 1MB limit. Why are you lying?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 17:48:04

/u/shadowofharbringer isn't breaking any rules. You harassing users and [calling them turds]( is breaking the rules. You're right, just reported you.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 17:08:01

It's suspected /u/ClarenceBCH might be /u/loopNester. He sacrificed his loopNester account since he was exposed to give credibility to ClarenceBCH. Both accounts harassed Roger relentlessly.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 16:56:21

BCH focus on scaling first then privacy, while Monero puts privacy first, then scaling. They complement each other and are similar in many ways. - Both use hardforks regularly to upgrade, defeating trolls like /u/vegarde who promote Blockstream's 2014 FUD - Both BCH and XMR have the ability to pump out bigger blocks than Bitcoin as transaction volume increases. - Both aim to have utility and not just claim to be stores of values while providing no utility.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 16:12:52

> Lol, and even in his chart the number of XMR transactions hasn't increased. yeah right. Imagine how many months he waited just so the dips lined up rofl. Trolls are so desperate I'm pretty sure this is /u/beardedCake new account, based on his wording. He even admits it's an alt account

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 16:08:35

lol /u/vegarde pushing misinformation. Satoshi discussed raising the blocksize AFTER he introduced the temporary 1MB limit. Why are you lying?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 15:40:52

How many days did you wait for this cherrypicking moment for the tx count to line up like this? Hernzzz is that you?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 15:07:56

You just called me a turd in another thread, should I report you for harassment as well?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 14:18:35

Can confirm /u/ClarenceBCH is a troll. Why is the trolls have problems with being outed and tagged? Does it make trolling harder when you get called out?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 13:58:45

/u/nullc is this why you quit Blockstream? You realized Liquid was a failed product long ago?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 13:57:34

> Bitcoin Core has not raised the fee. The fees are set by users. Bitcoin Core raised the fee by keeping the blocksize small. Even Maxwell celebrated creating the fee market as a result of keeping the blocksize small. Do you need a link to his comment? Are you saying Bitcoin Core devs don't understand supply and demand or you don't understand supply and demand? How are you so out of touch?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 13:42:44

What a sidestep, give this man a medal for using logic so horribly. limited blockspace is a good to be shared? Are you reading from a script?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 13:41:47

So another problem of LN is limited ability to send funds? I don't have that problem on onchain Bitcoin. Who would have guessed LN introduces more problems than it solves?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 12:36:32

Mass Battery Gang (TM) checking in here to say "no problem". Also typically if too many rockets stack up due to barrier, make sure to move your ships to another roid before barrier drops.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 26, 2020 12:34:51

> There is no such "plan". It's in your head. that is Bitcoin Core's plan. Why would they raise fees otherwise? What is Bitcoin Core's roadmap then? The more I talk with you, the more I realize you had no idea what Bitcoin Core's roadmap is or scaling plan.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 12:23:48

> I don't trust second layer solutions yet. You shouldn't trust them period. Offchain as demonstrated by LN allows money to be stolen ignoring hashrate by taking advantage of ochain's problem. Believing offchain will ever be as secure as onchain is where the original lie was set. It will never be as secure as onchain period.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 12:22:14

Ignore OP hes a troll. Check his post history

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 12:13:15

> If you live on very little money, and running a full node starts to cost significant portion of that income, then you are forced to trust that others do the job of keeping bitcoin trustless. Which is sort of an oxymoron. What good will running a node do for a person making $2 per day if Bitcoin Core's plan is to have transactions cost $35-$50 as per it's plan to replace the coinbase reward? Yes you are confused. Which is why anytime you're asked to quantify something you get it wrong.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 10:38:18

Are you high? Ethereum hardforks regularly with no issue as does Monero. More FUD from Blockstream. Censorship of the community and silencing non-Blockstream proposed solutions is what fractures the community.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 10:33:17

says the guy that settled for a Bitcoin that requires sacrificing decentralization or functionality of Bitcoin while allowing a private company to sell a solution that works than any of the current Bitcoin scaling methods.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 10:23:49

> If your next comment isn't a quantifiable measurement of node count versus network health then it's obvious you have no clue what you're talking about, which has always unfortunately been the case with you when discussing Bitcoin. If you cannot quantify trustlessness than perhaps you don't understand it in the first place. Hence why I ask you to quantify it. It seems you dance around this obvious logical inability and instead resort to poetry about "hurting the ecosystem" as well as referring to other users as "turds" when confronted with this game of charades.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 10:20:15

does anyone of them work as well as onchain Bitcoin? Ie ability to send to someone offline, no cap on sent amount, and decentralized?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 10:16:32

Why would /r/bitcoin users need the money?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 08:23:03

So why are people working on Lightning if sidechains are the future?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 08:10:11

in the case of Bitcoin is was artificially forced due to supply constraints. So yes in this case it was switched on.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 07:59:37

> If your next comment isn't a quantifiable measurement of node count versus network health then it's obvious you have no clue what you're talking about, which has always unfortunately been the case with you when discussing Bitcoin.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 26, 2020 07:56:30

true but Google figured that part out and it's independent of the manufacturer. My Huawei hasn't received a manufacturer update in years but received Google security updates 6 months ago.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/linux on June 25, 2020 21:43:35

relax friend. Find a relaxing album and gather your wits so you can make a sound argument.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 17:38:17

I think so. It would explain the handful of times when we were hiding in a big bush only for an approaching team to stop 100m or to stop and snipe at a bush despite us not exposing ourselves.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 25, 2020 17:33:12

Put on a relaxing track in your music player and take a day or 2 to calm down and let your emotions uncloud your judgment. Then we can discuss. Attempting to reframe everything as victories or losses is your way of sidesteping the obvious fact that user consensus trump POW.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 17:31:14

That's what I said. Thank you. Then /u/Contrarian__ started bolding words and getting emotional and redefining events. Both invalid and valid Bitcoin chains were overruled by human consensus at one time or another, proving Bitcoin rules and hashpower follow user consensus not the other way around like you said: > Ok, so you are with me up until this point that hashpower follows user consensus, user consensus does not follow hashpower.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 16:53:49

When one can't compete on the merits of their own product or have nefarious intent, they need to control the narrative via censorship. It's basic logic 101. The best example is /r/bitcoin not allowing any other scaling option besides Blockstream's SegWit citing no other method has consensus. Well how can one reach consensus let alone measure it if you can't start a conversation in the first place?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 16:22:07

No one's competing for milliseconds. I would say if you can complete the transaction in under 10 seconds even that would be acceptable. Sometimes little shops use those tiny little card machines and it takes 20-30 seconds depending on internet speeds and other factors and I don't hear users or merchants complain. Can you share what experience or source is making you believe we need to compete with credit card speeds?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 16:20:27

Your point is to focus on improving the 500ms and not the 10 minutes on Bitcoin?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 16:10:56

Where's your friend /u/loop_nester? Aren't you guys tag teaming threads with FUD? When is Roger leaving for BSV lol

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 16:07:28

what a time we live in. 3 years ago BCH was listed under anything but the official name and logo, today we're seeing consistency as exchanges recognize they need to start acting professionally.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 16:06:42

what about bushes, big and small? I swear I've had people snipe us in bushes for no reason.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 25, 2020 16:00:51

iPhone is just marketing and a sandtrap to close people off by entrenching them in their services limited to their devices. While Android services can be used on either platform. Just knowing that this is Apple's approach to retaining users tells you all there is to know about how worse the platform is compared to the market alternatives. If you can't entice users and retain users through better products, the alternative is locking them in or making them feel like they need to remain out of missing out. Think green/blue iMessages and other services being Apple only. Compare Siri to Google Assistant, Apple Music vs Spotify, Google Drive vs iCloud, email handling etc. It's all objectively worse. On that note I like to poke my friend and laugh at his iPhones poor battery life despite him thinking I have a poorboy Android phone. Everytime we meet up, he's chained to a wall charger at 6pm, so often I purchased a 10ft Lightning cable for him at my house, despite not owning any Apple products. No matter what party or event, he's in the kitchen or by an outlet charging his phone and our phones are the same age and same price when purchased.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/linux on June 25, 2020 15:53:15

I'm not going to argue with you when the fact is crystal clear, that existing Bitcoin rules were changed as a result of human consensus deciding to take that course. Previous rules were valid, new rules were added ie SegWit showing that human consensus > Bitcoin rules. Let me quote from the article since you probably missed it: > Ok, so you are with me up until this point that hashpower follows user consensus, user consensus does not follow hashpower. My experience with you bolding words is again you showing your letting your emotions cloud your judgement. I'm not here to manage your emotions. Have a good day.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 15:39:05

> My wife got an iPhone X when it came out, and the digitizer stopped working after a few weeks. My wife is the most careful person with her stuff, this was totally an issue with the hardware. Where previously Apple's support was awesome, all of a sudden with the X they tried to deny everything. They wanted her to pay to get it fixed, even though she had a warranty. We had to complain on social media to get them to agree to replace the phone. Apple took a nose dive with support sometime around the 2013/2014. I have a friend who worked in an Apple store for years and he told me there was a pretty big shift in raising the bar so to speak on denying claims and more reliance on diagnosis tools that were often misleading in conclusion. Apple's not what they used to be. > The replacement phone then promptly bricked itself within 2 weeks during an update that Apple pushed out. We had to again reach out on social media to get them to replace that one. This time, we found out that Apple gives out refurbished phones for replacements, which we are very upset about. Apple support is the absolute worst. Vote with your wallet and if you haven't learned the lesson by 2020, it's don't believe any company that's owned by shareholders. Given enough time they will always without fail prioritize shareholder profits over user experience so long as there's another dime to squeeze out. Apple's rise to fame with the iPhone just accelerated the process. Imo one of the sleaziest indicators of Apple being deceitful was the battery throttling event. Silently throttling someones phone due to poorly engineered battery with no room for spikes in usage and putting the pain onto users instead of outright taking responsibility was the pinnacle of deceit. No doubt when the issue was confirmed as problematic, they spun a problem as a potential way to increase iPhone sales. When your phone slows down and crawls, is your first thought to replace it's battery or buy a new phone that will be fast? Yeah it's cut and dry what what their intent was there.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/linux on June 25, 2020 15:35:17

Take a look at SegWit being activated. In that case previous rules were valid but again human consensus overrode Bitcoin's valid rules as the miners agreed to apply a new set of rules, replacing the old ones. Are you sure you're not new to Bitcoin?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 15:28:57

> That was an exceptional circumstance. It was an unforeseen bug, not the expected behavior of the system. Having no block size limit would make this part of the system. And that's all that's required to override Bitcoin's rules. Human consensus overrode what was Bitcoin's code and rules, invalid or valid.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 15:21:44

Not everyone will get it. It's a short article which is amazing, but I'd take the time to read and think about each sentence, notably after OP defines ERN's and their incentives.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 15:21:12

>> In Bitcoin, there are no actual rules. > Oh boy... Haha there are rules until there's a problem. Bitcoin had rules that decided the 0.7 fork was valid, but again humans decided to override Bitcoin's rules. It's like you didn't read OP's article. Bitcoin has rules but are second to human consensus.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 15:20:05

> What? There was a PowerMac G5 and it was 64 bit. Yes my bad. Your right it was released but lasted a whopping 3 generations before they realized their chips couldn't scale. They had issues with thermals (Apple and thermal problems eh). They never reached the intended clock speeds they were going for and decided switching to Intel was the best move. Thanks for reminder.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/linux on June 25, 2020 15:18:07

yup just a few examples of Epic changing stuff or marketing if falsely in the shop. And we have no refund tickets to make short fixes of Epic's problems.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 25, 2020 15:09:14

Love the article. Well described and written very clearly.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 15:07:02

> What if a block is accepted by 50% of the network, and the other 50% rejects it as invalid? What will break the tie? We already had such an event in 2013 with Bitcoin between version 0.7 + 0.8. Simply put people will need to break the tie and decide on consensus.,to%20%E2%80%9Cfork%E2%80%9D%20into%20two.&text=First%20of%20all%2C%20the%20incident,actors%20in%20the%20Bitcoin%20ecosystem. In OP's article he clearly states: > Proof of Work is non-binding. Meaning no one has to follow the longest chain. **Users can ignore proof of work in three forms** - orphan blocks, fork off, or leave the chain altogether. We've had examples of all 3 in Bitcoin.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 15:03:08

Epic Games is a shady company and knows exactly what they're doing. Any company that sells itself to shareholders will only do what's best of shareholders including shady tactics like these to increase revenue. This applies to all big companies like Apple, Google, Epic Games, etc.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 25, 2020 14:58:23

What about Trump and his actions? Reddit obviously leans left and carpet bombs hard with leftist views on any action he takes. More or less I agree but I'm sure stuff was twisted out of context. Any Trump events that stand out compared to left views or his actions in regards to this pandemic?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/media_criticism on June 25, 2020 14:32:28

Yeah I understand this sub is mostly kids so I don't take it personally that /u/Tamerando doesn't get it. Plus it seems he's new to the scene and is new to Fortnite. It's obvious Epic Games plays dirty with the shop several ways. Why does Japan have a buy confirmation button, but America does not? Obviously people mistakenly buying stuff makes them money. That's 100% clear.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 25, 2020 14:29:26

For those of us old enough to remember Apple decided move from Motorola's 68000 to PowerPc and promised great things like 64 bit processor and promised a Power Mac G5 which never came due to many problems with IBM's ability to manufacture the PC's and specifically heat problems officially. They were out of their depth. They kept advertising the switch to Power Pc but it never came and ended up just switching over to Intel chips in the end. The situation is similar to their promises for an ARM processor for laptops/desktops.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/linux on June 25, 2020 14:09:10

> The Citations Needed podcast is really great for deconstructing media narratives. Can you give me some recent deconstructions of the the last year's propaganda? Just to see what I'm missing out on.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/media_criticism on June 25, 2020 13:59:45

Forget the 500ms, it's a strawman. /u/DrBaggypants literally turned a blind eye to Bitcoin's 10+ minute wait times so he could hate on a 500ms wait time. It's all he's got and he's doing his best to troll. *"Hey guys why is there fly in my turd sandwich"*

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 13:30:11

What sources have you found for easy access to non filtered events world wide or perhaps USA oriented? Even reddit manipulates news.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/media_criticism on June 25, 2020 13:26:47

> Apple still provides the longest term of OS updates out of any brand. iOS 14 is still coming to the iPhone 6S. Apple just reached feature parity that Android has had since 2010 and not even. Some default apps, widgets, etc. We welcome Apple to 2010. Android gives features to phones today, Apple gives the same feature to phones 5/10 years later. It's pretty obvious Android is the better option to have if you want new features, not Apple. A 5 year old Android has had widgets for 5 years since day 1, while a 5 year old iPhone will get those same features after 5 years. Not to mention, I thought /r/linux was for technical minded people and I thought you should be able to see through Apple's decisions. You do know that even though Apple finally decided to allow setting the default browser... on iOS ALL browsers must use Apple's web rendering engine, effectively meaning you now get to choose between Safari reskinned as Chrome or reskinned as Firefox/Brave/etc. It's a slap in the face decision.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/linux on June 25, 2020 13:22:40

This 100% Most people treat this game like another CoD or team slayer game, where the goal is to kill as many people as possible for bragging rights. In those games it's 99% mechanical skill and reflexes with little strategy planned for the next 5 minutes of the game. Meanwhile Fortnite is about placement, knowing when to push, knowing when to rotate and where, knowing who to engage or who to disengage, etc. It's more about strategizing than it is about killing. Literally the game mode is Last Man Standing and naturally the way to win is to pick less fights, not more.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 25, 2020 13:14:56

and where in the shop does it say: This sound is only when it hits people, otherwise it makes another sound that you can't preview. I think we can both agree that in a typical game of Fortnite using a pickaxe in game 99% will be used for harvesting, not hitting people. Why then would the shop advertise the sound used in minority of situations and not the majority?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 25, 2020 13:09:30

I chuckled at /u/DrBaggypants comments... He's saying that 500ms of using a QR code versus NFC is a deal breaker... meanwhile Bitcoin was stripped of 0-conf and it's throttled capacity makes Bitcoin's confirmations unpredictable in addition to expensive. It can take anywhere from 10 minutes to hours to get confirmations confirmed depending on trading activity that week. lol complaining about 500ms wait time while completely ignoring Bitcoin's 10 minute block times.... is some major cognitive dissonance.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 12:57:32

> I don't dispute that Apple also makes poor laptop internals for the money Apple also makes poor iPhone internals for the money as well. - iPhone 6 touch disease issue was due to an IC coming off the board over time simply because Apple decided to save a few cents on a metal plate to keep the chip in place > Apparently the logic board bends during regular use, thanks to an engineering flaw on the iPhone 6 Plus, which means the connections between the two IC chips become separated from the logic board. The solder simply breaks. - iPhones also throttle due to poor thermal handling. - iPhone batteries were not properly engineered to handle spikes in usage, hence them throttling phones as "fix". No other phone manufacturer has had to resort to such a "fix" and Apple is supposed to be good premium hardware according to it's marketing. - Radio issues with Steve Jobs telling you you're holding the phone wrong. This is just off the top of my head.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/linux on June 25, 2020 12:53:52

Can confirm Huawei's recent updates made BT skip the first time you use it in the day.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 25, 2020 12:32:59

rofl you said "Tether is fine" and now that not everything is kosher. You understand the dilemma with Tether... right? Everything is fine until it isn't. When they find out their tether isn't backed by anything than IOU's then people rush to sell their tether and so on. Without adding more to the Tether dilemma Tether used to be backed 1-1 by the dollar, then crypto, then IOU's and some type of loans and Tether recently cancelled it's last audit with Freedman LLP for unknown reasons. For comparison Circle's stable coin passed 3 audits by now without issue, while Tether cancelled the last one. Make of that what you will. Hell even Adam Back investor into Tether literally said last week that he has no clue what's going with the audits.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 12:28:31

> ok buddy first things first, you can cancel your purchase so any "accidental purchases" are totally fix-able Now you can. 1-1.5 years ago there was no 5 minute window, until users complained. Been playing since season 1 where battlepass wasn't even a thing. As a new player how do you like Fortnite this season?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 25, 2020 11:45:15

> Around 80% of Bitcoin addresses are ahead right now. Sounds like a casino not a currency. "Sell your fiat for Bitcoin, 80% come out ahead"

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 11:40:07

> BCH did 80% worse than BTC. It sure did. But BCH sells it's utility, not store of value, as no cryptocurrency is currently a great store of value. Telling people to buy Bitcoin because it's a store of value.... and then losing 55% speaks for itself. But telling someone you can send money to someone around the world for 1 penny in 10 minutes is true for BCH, not BTC. Bitcoin has no utility to offer in relation to BCH.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 11:35:12

> It was an example of a ridiculous question, about as ridiculous as yours. Actually it's quantifiable event which is what you asked for and didn't realize it. See: > Until you can, you have no proof there is a capacity problem on the BTC blockchain. - /u/vegarde Bitcoin literally lost merchants of the lack of capacity on Bitcoin and we can measure it by merchants lost. See: > As of today, Steam will no longer support Bitcoin as a payment method on our platform due to high fees and volatility in the value of Bitcoin. - Steam **Fully quantifiable.** Meanwhile I'm still waiting for you to quantify network health in relation to node count, and your strawmanning with lol 1 node count. I've already proven without a doubt that Bitcoin shed 140k nodes in the last 3 years and there was 0 measurable impact on the Bitcoin network, it's health or functionality. Unless you can quantify damage done by losing 160k nodes then you don't have any argument to stand on. If your next comment isn't a quantifiable measurement of node count versus network health then it's obvious you have no clue what you're talking about, which has always unfortunately been the case with you when discussing Bitcoin.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 11:31:37

Have they been audited yet? Even investor /u/adam3us isn't able to state why Tether has cancelled any audits with Freedman LLP or what's going on. Other coins meanwhile completed them.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 11:24:44

> BCH has lost 80+% is it's buying power in terms of Bitcoin BTC. Imagine being so out of touch that you believe losing 55% of it's value is a selling point. xD *"Hey guys come spend your fiat on BTC. You'll only lose 55% of it's value while offering no utility."*

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 11:23:18

I'm still waiting on quantifiable values from you, so you can measure damage to a system. It seems you're not willing to provide any despite reaching conclusions with no backing. Meanwhile you asked about capacity and then dropped that question so fast xD > Until you can, you have no proof there is a capacity problem on the BTC blockchain. - /u/vegarde . > As of today, Steam will no longer support Bitcoin as a payment method on our platform due to high fees and volatility in the value of Bitcoin. - Steam

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 11:16:18

Node count does not affect blocksize silly. Wow you're more misinformed about Bitcoin's technical than I thought. Makes sense that you refuse to quantify anything. > Until you can, you have no proof there is a capacity problem on the BTC blockchain. Sure, the people complaining about the high fees and slow confirmations. Steam the merchant even cited both high fees and slow confirmations as the reason for dropping Bitcoin as a payment. Checkmate noob.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 10:59:55

> Blockstream does not govern bitcoin. Then why were only Blockstream approved solutions allowed for discussion like SegWit, but blocksize increases were banned?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 10:57:54

> You'd not have a problem transact if there was just 1 node either Yeah you would. Bitcoin would be then be 1 DDOS away from not working by attacking just one node. Now going back to actual real world examples, Bitcoin dropped from 180k nodes to 40k nodes and you're unable to link the blocksize increase as the reason for the drop. Can you? Because so far it's just assumptions with no way to quantify it lol. I love calling out trolls for pushing FUD. They're never able to support their claims.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 10:50:58

> As long as you have refunds available, you can refund anything purchased within the last 30 days for literally any reason. all used up. Epic is a sneaky bastard. Skins that have more than 1 version swap the buy button with view preview button which is how I purchased 3 skins I never wanted. Back then there was no 5 minutes timer to refund. In the Japan version of Fortnite I believe their is a confirmation button before purchasing a skin, but not in the USA. If that isn't a clear indicator of Epic being sleazy I don't know what is.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 25, 2020 10:35:22

> Messing around with QR codes and phone apps will never match the ease and convenience of contactless credit cards with a 500ms confirmation times. Users don't care. For reference I go to QuickCheck everyday and almost everyone uses their Quickcheck app to scan the QR code at the register for their free coffee after 6 paid ones, then they tap+pay at the terminal using NFC. I have yet to see anyone complain about it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 10:28:48

Idk I bought it much later and once I tried it in my first game I realized I was ripped off. Epic has the stupid rule if you use the item in game just once you can't refund it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 25, 2020 10:24:26

and Dark Bombers pickaxe doesn't make horse sounds when it hits, despite advertising the sounds in the shop. Such a letdown.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 25, 2020 10:16:08

Their hardware is OK and it's great to see them design their own chips, but they shoot themselves in the foot with the following defects: - iOS being intentionally limited in functionality, the Fisher Price of mobile OS. Arbitrary dev decisions, crippling or removing arbitrary functionality etc - Great CPU's, but doesn't matter when they have shit thermal handling.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 25, 2020 10:14:25

truth, but when Bitcoin Core stripped all value from Bitcoin the only narrative they have left is SoV, so they run with that.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 10:11:42

Article really hit it out of the park. And more importantly it's place on coinmarketcap's blog which sees a lot of users regularly. Roger Ver did a great job dispelling all the FUD that trolls love to parrot. All I can say is almost every point the Ver addressed, I saw the [Vince McMahon meme in my head]( > People seem to think I created Bitcoin Cash. I had nothing to do with the creation of Bitcoin Cash and I didn’t start promoting Bitcoin Cash until it became clear that Bitcoin wasn’t going to be allowed to scale to be permissionless money for the world. Dispels the notion that Roger Ver somehow created a premine when BCH was airdropped evenly to all current Bitcoin holders. Trolls love to imply BCH was only created because Roger Ver wanted his own Bitcoin to control, when in fact he didn't get involved until AFTER BCH's creation. Checkmate trolls. > I underestimated how big an effect censorship can have on a community. I watched first hand as the small block Bitcoiners used censorship and propaganda against the big block Bitcoiners who supported free speech. Ver succinctly brings up Blockstream censorship of any scaling path that wasn't officially endorsed by Blockstream. If you remeber, once Theymos took over the only scaling discussions that were allowed was SegWit, no blocksize increases. Hell even today you can't mention a blocksize increase in /r/bitcoin... so how can you ever reach consensus if you can't even start a chat about it? > In order for something to be usable as a store of value it MUST have an additional use case outside of being a store of value. > The dollar is used as a store of value because you can spend them anywhere. > In prison stamps or tobacco are used as a store of value because you can mail letters or smoke them. Shuts down the false narrative that a SoV does not need any usecase, easily dismantling the Bitcoin Core/Blockstream koolaid. > Try actually transacting with crypto. Get some BTC or BCH and then buy something from Amazon at a 25% discount from (You will save more money by using Bitcoin Cash) Easily drops a great use case for crypto as well as highlights the different between BTC and BCH that everyone can understand: high fees eat into your BTC money, but not BCH. Naturally BCH is the better money. /u/MemoryDealers you've learned a lot over the years and this interview was A+ level. Keep up the good work in the crypto community!

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 10:10:24

I remember when TravelByBits agent was caught buying upvotes to push his misinformation campaign. We have clear proof of that. Totally normal behavior for an honest person lolol

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 09:35:18

However you want, it's Android. You can remove all apps, or some, or none from the homescreen. You can arrange them how you like in whatever shape or size, etc. Kinda like Windows 10 icons. Meanwhile the iPhone is stuck like Windows 98 icons set to "auto-arrange" lol

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 25, 2020 09:05:39

Their home screen is like Windows 98 with icons set to "auto-arrange". They're stuck in 1998.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 25, 2020 09:04:32

Care to quantify how users were affected? /u/vegarde isn't able to either Also is this your Gitlab?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 08:56:28

> Trying to calculate exactly how much it hurts is like arguing how much it hurts to beat your wife before deciding that it's wrong. I'll quantify it for you then. BTC had 180k nodes, now it has 40k. Bitcoin works just the same as when it had 180k nodes as it does with 40k. Bitcoin was not hurt by a blocksize, I have no problem transaction now than I did earlier. See how easy it is to quantify block size increases?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 08:47:58

> Who says nothing was hurt? But it might have been, it might not. If you're going to say something was hurt you need to quantify it. Otherwise it doesn't mean anything. How do you measure hurt? It seems you're relying on feeling not facts to quantify technology.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 08:37:12

> Look, it is pretty simple: There is no such thing as a "safe" block size increase. It will all hurt. Even Segwit did. Before we go any further you'll need to quantify how much it hurt the Bitcoin ecosystem. If you cannot then you don't have an argument but a fantasy.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 08:29:14

It's two sided sword, so maybe not. On one side if the squad listens were literally guaranteed top 3, mostly because we avoid fights when we can and position ourselves well and we win 1/3 or 1/4 games this way. However some see it as taking fun out of the game when you take it more seriously like this. Either way herding cats gets tiring.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 25, 2020 08:06:20

yeah like you saying 8MB will hurt the ecosystem and were unable to quantify your claims. You never fail to amaze me how you'll spin stories next.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 08:03:58

> The reason we actually discuss this, is that there are no absolutes. exactly, so why do you say it will hurt the ecosystem when Bitcoin went from 180k to 40k and nothing was hurt? You're making drama with no source to support your dramatization. And then you wonder why you get called out for pushing FUD and lies.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 25, 2020 08:03:10

Yeah i remember him. Was caught buying upvotes with proof.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 22:53:31

They want to hide their tracks of regularly misinforming users. I experienced an entire 4 year old account delete itself minutes after being exposed for pushing misinformation during the hashwar. Sauce: This month another account /u/loopNester also deleted itself after being exposed for a string of misinformation along with brigading with /u/rattie_ok on common threads: Sauce: It's common and almost expected here.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 20:04:09

You're comparing a paid solution versus a free one. The point is, you can torrent if you want to on Android on iOS you cannot.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 24, 2020 19:49:39

So many trolls. BCH got the trolls jealous

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 18:54:03

You must not grasp marketing well either

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 18:52:10

Its water cooled when they water the potato

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 24, 2020 16:58:25

Yeah it's frustrating. Can't play at your 100%, you need to dumb down your gameplay to theirs so your can "enjoy" the game. I'm the team's strategist and leader mostly because the rest don't want to take charge or don't know how. 1 player is becoming my second in command as he's learned my flow from repetition but still falls for the basic greed issues because of herd behavior. "Hey if player 3 is looting so can I, despite our leader already rotating". Just yesterday I announce that we have to move as we just cleaned up our landing zone. I'm moving and I'm watching them on the minimap bumbling around despite getting verbal confirmation from both that they know they need to move. After I get a 50-100m lead due to them bumbling they got jumped by marauders of all things and died. Not going back, going to play the rest of the game slowly even if it means camping in bushes just to let them think about their mistakes. even basic shit they don't understand after a few seasons. - Stop looking around to try to spot players, you're losing distance stopping and looking around. - If you don't stop moving anyone behind us can never catch up, at best keep the same distance. Everytime you stop to check behind you to snipe you're losing distance between them and us. - Them stopping at smaller POI's for chests. for what... 20smg ammo and a green rifle? They don't weight risk and reward at all. It's like herding cats.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 24, 2020 16:20:39

It's insane because when Microsoft took hold of their own OS and forced Netscape out and came preinstalled with Ie they got split up. Apple does literally the same exact thing and nothing. Only difference is market share in the Android/iOS duopoly. Even worse, Apple's recent "default browser" is a slap in the face to consumers. Apples rules prohibit using any other web rendering engine but theirs, so Chrome/Firefox are just reskinned Safari...

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 24, 2020 16:11:45

rofl imagine requiring using a KYCed exchange for privacy xD

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 16:09:22

We all know, but we ask /u/Cobra-Bitcoin anyway to see what his views are of the day. He changes and postures so much without doing anything that it's become an inside joke by now.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 15:59:21

Can confirm I'm #7 too. "Guys we need to rotate now, we got all the basics and shields" "Guys we need to rotate now, otherwise we'll get pinned. I've marked the map were we need to go, but we need to move **now** and get as much distance between us and the people behind us" "Guys stop looting ffs, it's the 3rd circle and all of you got scars and purple tacs. You don't need anything else. Jim don't stop for that chest." "Guys we need to rotate now, stop sniping. Yes I know about the players east of us, ignore them and keep moving." *Team gets pinned by the squad pushing behind us, forced to turtle and fight back. Gets their shit pushed in by a 3rd party as well.* "Well guess I'm the only one left, fuck your cards". The only vindicating move is when you end up winning 1 of 10 of these games, because the last few squads have players missing also. Then you call it a nice first solo win of the day.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 24, 2020 15:42:41

/u/Cobra-Bitcoin posts here and acts like a person of good faith but he's just maintaining his control of and reaching for any money he can while he's still in control. He'll support whatever movement makes him money. Remember when an anonymous account posted a link to a shitty shakedown website of Blockstream in /r/btc what looked to be made by a 5 year old? That was Cobra attempting to extract more money from the Bitcoin ecosystem under the guise of "doing good". Did any info get leaked since? Nope. Don't listen to snakes or cobras kids.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 13:17:42

Have you provided any ways for price to go up, because I didn't see any in your article. Perhaps you spend more time on the crypto scene to better understand what investors look for in coins, because it's none of the points in your article. Not to mention your high level price point is clearly wrong. Ethereum is now giving Bitcoin a run for it's money and it's price too floundered like BCH's in the early years despite offering great value since day 1. Took Ethereum 5 years to start gaining momentum and marketcap.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 13:04:54

Agree 100%. OP is speaking from inexperience. He needs to spend more time reading and understanding the history of crypto before offering his advice. It's ill conceived and poorly thought out.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 13:03:54

I hate to say it but you make a lot of assumptions and many wrong points. > It is extremely unfair that 12.5% of what a miner produces from a block reward (their property) goes towards funding development. If coinbase reward is cut by 12.5% then effective reward is cut by 12.5% meaning we get 12.5% less hashrate. Imo that's not a bad trade in exchange for funding developers who create value and features that attract more investors and then raise BCH's price. You want to raise BCH price but offer no way to do so. Not to mention with BCH hashrate being vastly overshadowed by BTC's cutting it another 12.5% is nothing. The only thing I didn't like with the IFP was the forced attitude versus voting. > Replace the difficulty adjustment algorithm ASAP and you come back full circle to your own illogical statement. Why should developers do anything for free? You want solutions, but don't want to pay for them. If you have a solution please recommend it, but demanding someone fix something for free is idiotic. > Completely remove the 50 chained unconfirmed transaction output limit, or significantly raise the limit to the point where there is no effective limit Limits exist for a reason, as someone will find a way to exploit no limit chaining, etc. Limits are safeguards to protecting the network as a whole. Same thing with blocksize, we don't arbitraraly raise the limit like BSV did because somewhere there's limitations. Slowly raising limits is a better approach. > Lift the 2MB soft limit put on blocksize If a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound? If blocks are regularly under 100kb, do we ever hit the 2MB limit? The artificial stress tests was the only time 2MB+ blocks were made. Again a pointless proposal, just for the sake of waving a flag. > The price needs to increase to a point where Bitcoin Cash can be taken seriously Oh jesus, why didn't we think of that? OP I'm sorry but your proposals are born out of inexperience and being new to this community. Another user in this thread said it better: > [So you've identified market value as the problem, but your entire list of suggestions are things consumers couldn't care less about, and has nothing to do with driving adoption. Ok.]( You want change, offer no way to fund this change and your only proposals the market doesn't care about.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 13:01:24

I'm not here to change your mind, some minds can't be changed like flat earthers. > You’re just wrong about this I’m afraid, this is Epic doing a poor job at game testing and fixing bugs. Exactly. Epic has a history of bugs, and flopped fixes. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Zip lines have existed for 1-2 years now and you're to tell me OP never once ran into this bug once or hell heard of it? I don't buy it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 24, 2020 12:42:44

Again Reddit is not required to be aware that this bug existed through several seasons. Had he simply kept reading patch notes from Epic up until Epic stopped releasing them he would have seen that Zip lines had several bugs and to be aware of them and this was one of them. His mistake was either not reading patch notes and keeping up to date with recent changes/meta which seems imprudent if you're playing competitive, or giving Epic the benefit of the doubt that the bug was fixed, which again was a bad idea as Epic has a history of doing sloppy patch jobs.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 24, 2020 12:33:41

> No-one in this game gets stable FPS, especially at the beginning of a season. You do if you drop your settings down and not run everything at Epic, really is the only way. Post processing to low notably has the biggest impact on consistent FPS. Of course I'm talking about getting consistent 144FPS not higher and at worst it dips to 130's. More than reasonable.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 24, 2020 12:10:56

> I mean I don’t know if he is to blame, he clearly doesn’t frequent reddit often by his profile. Reddit has nothing to do with. If he played fortnite this long he should expect that Epic has a long consistent history of sloppy bug fixes. What gives him the notion that Epic fixed this bug correctly or hell fixed it at all given there's no patch notes anymore? He just assumed it was fixed based on... what? > My comment was more as a helpful PSA to people to just not do this. Exactly. Assume w/e bugs have existed can still occur and still exist. No patch notes from Epic cement this mentality further. OP had no reason or indicator that should lead him to believe this bug was fixed. I'm just saying it's OP's fault not Epic's.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 24, 2020 12:08:34

> Until this bug is patched make sure to not land on “shallow” water after a zip line. I thought everyone knew about buggy zip lines since 2 chapters ago. 3 years of fortnite have taught us to assume Epic does sloppy patches for bugs and play accordingly. Especially now with no patch notes. Imo OP is to blame. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 24, 2020 12:03:56

> So I went to the scan, I see that I'm still holding my pickaxe out, which means the scan bugged and its not gonna open, so I leave it to wait for the animation, but then it turns out I'm stuck with the pickaxe Are you sure it's the pickaxe that causes the bug and not the angle you're facing at time of starting the scan? Never had a bug since I started standing directly in front of it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 24, 2020 12:00:05

> What I really want is to be able to see the Micro Factory titles from within the stash menu so I can easily pull out the ones I want to use, when I want to use them. .... that is the case. I've currently bought up 100 micro factories since the next patch will make them more expensive and slowly upgrading each to lvl5. When I max a microfactory to level 5, I rename it to "Max" and stash it and the stash tab shows microfactories named "max". Are you using iPhone or Android? what's your screensize?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 24, 2020 10:03:32

Apple sets such a low bar with Safari performance that they don't want any other browser showing them up.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 24, 2020 09:59:57

PITA. Especially with the placement bug. I'll probably do what you're doing since I've already saturated my sandship space with substance generators and underwell is the only thing I can remove. They really need to fix the game where microfactories which are blocked shouldn't be eating substance in the first place. But it seems to a be complicated issue to fix correctly, so I doubt it's going to change anytime soon.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 24, 2020 09:51:36

how do you handle underwell quests? Ignore them?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 24, 2020 09:46:16

or you realize big factories are a waste of space when you're limited to only 5 essence generators and micro factories is what you should be using. I've converted all my big factories to micros and I'm better of for it. In fact there's a patch coming out next that will significantly increase micro factories cost specifically because they're so damn good. Also at this time microfactories only require stuff you can produce to unlock floor sections. It's all winning, but sure you can quit the game too if you haven't explored the right way to play the game.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 24, 2020 09:43:57

So to be able to make any statements like "hurting the ecosytem" first you must quantify the minimum amount of BTC nodes required for a healthy Bitcoin network, as well as amount of nodes lost before syncing of the blockchain becomes an issue. Until then you're dramatizing and putting your own unfounded spin on the topic. Let me know when you've put a number on network health. If you're not able to measure it then obviously you can't make any statements about "hurting the ecosystem". Just basic logic that everyone can understand. Stop politicizing issues especially when you have no facts to back it up. Only trolls do that.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 09:34:46

> Any loss of nodes because they don't have the resources to spare does hurt the ecosystem. That's not true. Just to prove my point, if I turned off my node right now, which I just did would it hurt the ecosystem? Nope, the world wouldn't miss it. Would turning off 100 nodes hurt the ecosystem? I doubt it. **To be able to make that statement first you need to quantify what is the minimum set of Bitcoin nodes required before the network propagation degrades.** Hence why you dramatizing "hurting the ecosystem" is just that.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 09:21:00

> It's not misinformation - though we do disagree on a whole lot of things. It sure is, when you spin your interpretation of it, despite your own source being unable to quantify it as well. What is hurting the ecosystem? 1% node loss, 10% node loss, 100% node loss? Instead you took it upon yourself to spin it as "hurting the ecosystem" and that's why I pressed you cite your source, knowing full well there wasn't any verbiage of "hurting the ecosystem" nor was there any way to quantify it either. It's why it took over 8 comments just to get you to answer this question. No one's ridiculing yourself but yourself. I knew "hurt the ecosystem at 8MB" was not in your own source and it was you putting a spin on unquantifiable event.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 08:46:07

I doubt anyone torrents regularly on an Android phone, but a smartphone is essentially a pocket PC and there's no reason it shouldn't be able to. I was out of the country for a few weeks and wanted to catch up on some tv shows and I was able to on Android. iPhone would have left me out of luck.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 24, 2020 08:04:38

game emulators too, cryptocurrency was until Bitcoin made the news and I assume people complained. When you purchase an iPhone with your money, Apple decides how you're allowed to use your purchased product. On Android the user decides.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 24, 2020 08:02:14

> Elevated hardware requirements could result in a substantial percentage of full nodes dropping from the network should the block size increase to 8 MB right now. And that says nothing that it would hurt the ecosystem, just that lesser rasperry pi's won't be able to catch up. You're the one making the interpretation as 'hurt the ecosystem'. See that's why I asked you to quote the relevant section

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 24, 2020 07:57:57

> Can you cite the relevant section, where you're drawing your interpretation from?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 23, 2020 17:56:53

> It also concluded that 8 MB was too much and would hurt the ecosystem. No it did not. Can you cite the relevant section, where you're drawing your interpretation from? Either way BCH's stress tests proved them wrong.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 23, 2020 17:38:17

iOS is default Opt out for apps unless Apple approves, while Android is Opt in and allowed unless Google says no. And even if Google says no there's the option of sideloading, so virtually 100% of apps can run on Android that might be prohibited on either platform.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 23, 2020 17:35:18

Correct if I'm wrong, aren't there javascript functions that can read the clipboard? Which would mean while the banking website might be secure with their copy paste handling and default function, the clipboard would still contain the password for another website to read after you're done banking. Finding out which website the password was used for is another story however.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/programming on June 23, 2020 15:59:25

Torrents are banned on Apple, Game emulators, recently cryptocurrency applications until Bitcoin hit mainstream news in 2017, etc. I'm sure I missed a few. Android just allows more freedom by default than iOS does.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 23, 2020 15:54:08

Hh you know except for the 2 or 3 stress tests doing 5x Bitcoin's record transaction count in one day while fees remained sub cent. But we should forget about that otherwise wouldn't be able to comment.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 23, 2020 15:38:44

> You might be a person I have no interest in debating because you never provide anything od value except trying to ridicule your opposition. and yet you debated, up until I quoted your own source. So that's a lie. Your own source doesn't support your claim. In fact it promotes on chain scaling. You've been caught pushing misinformation again and it embarrasses you that you don't have a retort. All I did was quote the conclusion of your own paper and that was enough for your to drop the conversation. > **3 Conclusion** >In order for the Bitcoin ecosystem to continue developing, **the maximum block size needs to be increased.** There is common understanding among Bitcoin developers that the current limit of one megabyte limits scalability of Bitcoin and could prevent its wider adoption. This opinion is further supported by mathematical modeling that shows long transaction confirmation delays as the block size approaches its limit. > Because of the stated reasons, we consider BIP 100 to be the most prudent choice to grow the block size limit in the near-to-intermediate term. Next time you should take the time to read your own sources, so that you don't make a goof of yourself.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 23, 2020 14:16:36

It's funny because Vegarde was responding frequently but when he's caught pushing misinformation he stops responding and just engages other users to avoid the obvious. Since I replied with quoting **his own damn technical source** he's gone out of his way to reply elsewhere but to my response. Also you should check how he uses BSV's scaling approach (no prerequisite work, just lift blockize limit) to strawman that big blocks are unfeasable, completely ignoring ABC's approach of doing prerequisite work. He's knowingly being disingenuous and pushing misinformation.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 23, 2020 12:56:32

I don't get why that POI is so difficult. We learned last 2 chapters how to deal with henchmen and how to approach. These ones are just even tighter with aim and better weapons. Our squad is horrible, we literally play low ground gang with minimal building but we grab the chopper from the white mountain nearby, get some basic guns, land with the chopper on the catty corner main building so we have height and slowly pick off the AI's. Did it 3, 4 times last night and at worst one player died when we got 3rd partied. Great loot, great mats, and purple smg's for all.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 23, 2020 12:52:47

It's pretty obvious their code is now spaghetti at this point. When certain skins were bugged to remove footstep sounds you know they're dealing with some shit. Not to mention what is it with them totally redoing creative lobbies every 3 days, but the main map saw nothing last chapter. Waste of resources/time.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 23, 2020 12:48:54

Last chapter was what forced me off my Ps4 to PC and finally upgraded my graphics card to a gtx 1660 super. Only setting I lowered was post processing to medium and I get a solid 160FPS, at worst 137/140 fps minimum. Seeing as how consoles are mixed with PC lobbies anyway... and controller is meta, might as well.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 23, 2020 12:47:06

/u/vegarde provided a technical reason here, only for the paper to say exactly opposite of his claim. He's dancing around and avoiding responding

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 23, 2020 12:32:14

or move the UI such that the building you want to place is above an empty spot on the ship.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 23, 2020 10:02:34

> BSV continues to prove daily that extremely large blocks do lead to issues like orphan rate increase etc. what a strawman. They did no scaling work and just bumped up the limit, so of course it didn't work. If you're using BSV as an example you're being disingenous. You know they did no work to support that raised block limit. remember when BCH hit block limits at 8MB, 16Mb and 23MB? We fixed those bottlenecks and then kept raising limits, not raising it all at once with no prerequisite work. You're a shitty, shitty troll.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 23, 2020 09:26:03

From your link: > **3 Conclusion** >In order for the Bitcoin ecosystem to continue developing, **the maximum block size needs to be increased.** There is common understanding among Bitcoin developers that the current limit of one megabyte limits scalability of Bitcoin and could prevent its wider adoption. This opinion is further supported by mathematical modeling that shows long transaction confirmation delays as the block size approaches its limit. quite the opposite of your claim.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 23, 2020 08:56:37

> There is no way onchain scaling will make it to world-wide scaling. Can you link me to a technical objective analysis what that is?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 23, 2020 08:41:59

keep guessing. Imagine spending your whole day trolling a coin you have 0 investment in. I too go spend all my time trolling the /r/barbies subreddit because I hate barbies so damn much and feel like that's the best I can do with my time. Ken deserves better

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 23, 2020 07:59:55

and yet it proves your statement false: >Ofcourse we have 1 cent fees we have a fraction of BTC's load

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 23, 2020 07:58:12

> You're actually trolling. Am I? We're talking about a defect for the life of the product and Apple only offers 2 repairs before you need to open up your wallet? That's why there's a lawsuit. > Sigh. All keyboards break eventually Never had a keyboard break on me in all my life. Must be an Apple thing.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/hardware on June 22, 2020 22:23:40

use nano. There as community pack that contains it

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/synology on June 22, 2020 20:00:49

I love to pick cherries in the summer. The rest of the year I can't.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 22, 2020 19:58:19

Imagine being so new to the crypto scene that you can't find any transaction charts for public blockchains xD

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 22, 2020 16:41:10

this bot is stuck in a loop with the inability to understand responses

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 22, 2020 16:40:12

How did you not hear of BCH's stresstest doing 5x Bitcoin's record transaction count AND keeping fees under 1 penny? It makes your statement objectively wrong. If your technical understanding is that bad, I wouldn't follow any advice of yours. > Ofcourse we have 1 cent fees we have a fraction of BTC's load

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 22, 2020 16:24:28

we got some un-updated bots waking up from dormancy. They're back to parrot the Blockstream approved FUD. We've got the hashrate boogeyman for those that don't understand incentives and why someone would burn millions of dollars to attack BCh, as well as the "fees are only low, because low transaction count" for the bots waking up after the BCH stress tests. /u/mishax1 /u/Jadfadik /u/efwuhbk where have you guys been last few years? Did you not get new Blockstream talking points, because these are out of date.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 22, 2020 16:16:59

> You must be new here, so do your homework first. > > BCH did several stress tests a few years back doing 2.1million tx's in one day, 5x Bitcoin's record and fees remained under 1 penny. > > Your FUD is from 2015.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 22, 2020 16:13:29

You must be new here, so do your homework first. BCH did several stress tests a few years back doing 2.1million tx's in one day, 5x Bitcoin's record and fees remained under 1 penny. Your FUD is from 2015.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 22, 2020 15:40:52

Don't bother arguing with /u/mfanter . His argument is basically Apple's support for the badly designed butterfly keyboard was so good, that this class action lawsuit doesn't exist. lol. A class action lawsuit means their support WASN'T good enough. > The 1-year warranty Apple offers to users is acknowledged in the lawsuit, but it argues that “Apple routinely refuses to honor its warranty obligations,” instead instructing MacBook users to “try self-help remedies that it knows will not result in permanent repair. Not to mention the Apple repair program is limited to 2 repairs, on a flawed design that's garuanteed to break over time.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/hardware on June 22, 2020 14:15:42

Which means RandomX's goal of decentralizing hashrate on Monero failed. RandomX effectively moved centralization from ASIC farms to botnet owners. Over time only botnets will be left mining monero as they have 0 mining cost which will also give a few botnet owners control of the chain.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 22, 2020 12:54:23

> I don’t agree with your interpretation of the keyboard - the butterfly keyboard was innovative and had incremental but good improvements over the years. It’s true that the design is flawed - but it had other advantages. Any advantages are moot when the keys get stuck. > This is normal and frankly Apple gave pretty good support for these keyboards to be fixed. Why are you white washing and warping the truth? Apple didn't provide any support until a lawsuit was launched forcing them to start a repair program specifically for faulty butterfly keyboards: There wouldn't be a lawsuit if Apple was providing good support.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/hardware on June 22, 2020 11:03:46

Imagine not being able to give a single reason for miners to burn thousands of dollars. Imagine being a Blockstream troll who doesn't understand incentives or wasn't around for the hashwar. Tell me more about this Loch Ness monster you keep fantasizing about.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 22, 2020 10:30:21

> A simple 'long term' reality check is reliability of their products - and Apple consistently tops as the most reliable laptop brand: They had 4 years of laptops with the butterfly keyboard problem despite knowing it was a problem after year 1. If that isn't a junk brand I don't know what is. Your consumer report only mentions failure rate, which doesn't include design issues like these.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/hardware on June 22, 2020 10:04:15

better than deleting ones own comments out of shame I suppose.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Conservative on June 22, 2020 08:24:59

and what was the harassment? Even Tbone replied to the tag and continued the discussion with 0 mention of harassment.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 21, 2020 12:38:23

> You're not supposed to call out people and link to their comment as that is considered witch hunting and harassment of a user since it could lead to people DMing them and harassing them. Where is that written in the reddit rules or subreddit rules? Can you point me to it, so in the future I don't miss these rules? Same for the rest of your rules. I never once saw any rules for how username mention function should be used, either as a global rule or subreddit rules.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 21, 2020 09:03:42

what was the harassment? pointing out bad logic? or using reddit features?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 20, 2020 15:21:08

apparently neither place is when moderators delete their comments or yours

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 20, 2020 15:05:42

> You're tagging a user in another community attacking them by name tagging them. They same moderator banned me from that community for pointing out his bad logic. When he can't delete your comments after losing an argument, he deletes his as shown in that thread. A) Apple said Spotify freerides when it doesn't pay a 30% cut. B) Apple doesn't pay Google's 30% cut. C) Then by Apple's own words, Apple is freeriding.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 20, 2020 14:38:15

Stash the underwell and place it again.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 20, 2020 14:18:47

silly me, it's MeMu that has UI issues. Just installed Bluestacks and it works great!

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 20, 2020 11:43:48

how do you run sandship in blue stacks? The UI elements won't show.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 20, 2020 11:29:24

truth. They change topics depending on season.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 20, 2020 11:14:26

I got at another tip how you can make it seem like you met minimum quality requirements. change the border sizes to something bigger to make it seem like there's more on the page. It's amazing how a full night's rest gives you fresh ideas in the morning.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 20, 2020 10:27:43

1) Name tagging is a reddit feature 2) I don't see specific rules prohibiting name tagging in the side bar. If you're just adding this rule make sure to update the side bar 3) There's no witchhunt, it's pointing out flawed logic. Even Tbone knew it, hence the ashamed self deletion of his comment. Even you can understand the logic: A) Apple said Spotify freerides when it doesn't pay a 30% cut. B) Apple doesn't pay Google's 30% cut. C) Then by Apple's own words, Apple is freeriding.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 20, 2020 10:25:46

second that. It aligns more closely with the game mantra.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 20, 2020 10:24:02

yeah that helps thanks. We got sticky em.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 19, 2020 20:45:35

> I would like there to be a duplicate function on the selected items. This is to speed up design making when making symmetrical stuff. To blueprint a section of the warehouse first select the modules as if you were to move the few pieces, then blueprint will only clone those pieces.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 19, 2020 20:19:26

lol beardedcake went from posting every few hours in /r/btc to not posting at all after he got banned for harassing users here. I wonder if he'll pull a sly one and start trolling from BeardedCake2 soon.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 19, 2020 19:52:37

Just thought of another one. If you change the font to 12 to 12.5 most teachers won't notice.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 19, 2020 19:45:51

It still doesn't help that you can't read. He asked for quality, and you're counting sentences like a 3rd grader trying to meet the minimum homework assignment amount. If you sneak in double spaces it'll make it seem like you wrote more /s

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 19, 2020 19:34:30

at least the name fits. /u/beardedcake is that you?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 19, 2020 17:52:03

Basically. And then the argument was relabeled many ways including big blocks versus SegWit where trolls naturally took it further and said Noooo you cannot do Peta Blocks yet!

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 19, 2020 17:51:42

you learn to read son. He said your comment added no value to the conversation and your response was about comment length. You trolls are so dense.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 19, 2020 17:49:26

speculative markets are a hell of a drug.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 19, 2020 17:46:24

I like the in transit inventory system switching from per item caps vs one global cap. Otherwise I had one item usually clogging the whole system. It was tedious dragging items constantly just to unclog the whole system. Now you can afk and come back to a full inventory of everything.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 19, 2020 17:45:41

Good news is that Factorio already exists for PC and does a much better job there. Sandship is a vision of Factorio optimized for mobile.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 19, 2020 15:53:47

I was like you a few weeks back and thought it was paywalled but it's not. there's a way to get a lot out of the contracts. Someone else explained it to me here:

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 19, 2020 13:13:57

/r/Technology is the discussion of how technology works and affects us at a individual and societal level. In this case we're discussing how information is handled by social media networks in relation to "super users". If we were discussing headphones we would be discussing sound quality and battery life, but in the case of social media networks it's the propagation and handling of information.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/technology on June 19, 2020 12:52:02

He gave up his cards with such a move. Decided to not engage a losing argument but instead just silence the conversation with some politics. Over the years I had many examples of obvious /r/apple censorship and narrative control, but I never figured /r/android mods where just as bad. That's why I don't post in big subreddits anymore, they're all bought and paid for. Enjoy your day my dude! This morning was a riot.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 19, 2020 11:49:16

No, no, no, no no! You got it all wrong. When Satoshi was calling out the failing bank system for being immune to consequences of manipulating and inflating our money system in the very first block of the Bitcoin blockchain, what he was really pushing for was for a Bitcoin that would become a settlement layer for the the rich who could afford to pay the several dollar fees as designed by ~~Blockstream~~ Bitcoin Core devs. The whitepaper title of [*Bitcoin: A Peer to Peer Electronic Cash System*]( was a mistake due to autocorrect in Microsoft Word being notoriously bad back then. Thankfully with the help of private organizations like Blockstream and funding from AXA and other credit card processors they've fixed that typo and Bitcoin now functions properly as a store of value that should only be spent if you can afford the transaction fee. As per the Bitcoin Core roadmap transactions must cost $35-$50 to replace the dwindling coinbase reward so that we can store value better, for those that can afford it of course. #/s

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 19, 2020 11:44:34

That's why I hate posting in the big subreddits.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 19, 2020 11:28:14

> I don't understand this logic especially nowadays when even android flagships cost near or over $1k. The comment thread was pointing out how the /r/apple mods don't use logic to make a point but instead use personal bias to make a point. Don't expect them to use logic anywhere else, just more personal bias. Samsung and iPhone flagship phones all cost $1,000 or so these days. And yet according to Tbone if I purchase an $1000 iPhone i'm good, but if I purchase a $1000 Samsung I'm a poorboy lol. Great logic /s

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 19, 2020 11:11:19

It's funny because in /r/apple I used to call out this mod and a few other mods out for obvious bias and censorship. Their response was to just delete my comments and after a while just flat out ban me with no explanation. However since /r/apple mods have no moderation power in /r/android when they get caught with obvious lies, /r/apple moderators delete their own comments xD

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 19, 2020 11:00:30

Not really. The moment you can build substance generators + Recycler's you'll need more credit sinks.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 19, 2020 10:15:02

did you see the /r/apple mod using some funky logic to shill for Apple? he deleted his comments when I laid out the obvious logi

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 19, 2020 09:54:54

Either you don't understand or are did poorly in math class in highschool. Remember proofs? This has nothing to do with Google's rules. This has to do with Apple's own statement. Even you understand that. A) Apple said Spotify freerides when it doesn't pay a 30% cut. B) Apple doesn't pay Google's 30% cut. C) Then by Apple's own words, Apple is freeriding. The logic isn't hard, it's overcoming the cognitive dissonance when you have biases.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 19, 2020 09:37:22

The cognitive dissonance is reeeaal. Apple says Spotify not wanting to pay 30% is freeloading. By Apple's own words, is Apple freeloading in the Android Play store? Yes.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 19, 2020 09:19:35

Btw I'm loving this game, despite the influx of bug reports recently. The recent patch was a big positive flag that this game and the developers are doing their best to improve this game and have a solid understanding of what makes this gametype fun.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 19, 2020 09:07:45

unfortunately not fixed. Forced closed the app.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 19, 2020 08:39:26

Even better /r/apple mod /u/TBoneTheOriginal is defending Apple... after Apple made a statement where not paying the 30% is freeloading on the system. The cognitive dissonance is real. Sauce:

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 19, 2020 08:18:40

What fraud? Can you expand on this? The Bcash campaign was started weeks before BCH even forked. I never get an answer from /r/bitcoin mods when I ask this question.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 18, 2020 17:21:41

Bitcoin Core doesn't want competition and them getting proven wrong again. The campaign to rebrand and confuse users started weeks before BCH was even created on August 1st, 2017. Blockstream and Bitcoin Core members were very active and most vocal in this campaign. Let me know if you need any links.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 18, 2020 17:19:46

Actually I think anywhere items are displayed the UI should require a long press to throw you to the glossary or show a description as items are everywhere in the UI.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 18, 2020 16:23:33

reply to a comment of mine when you've fixed the issue. I'm still neither able to use the full space of lvl4 underwell OR produce any everstone and previously on lvl3 I was able to no problem.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 18, 2020 16:22:54

1) After the barrage nerf, what's the 3 weapons that you use? 2) Which ship do you suppress? Phoenix? In my case Storm is neutralized by my mass battery ship

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 18, 2020 16:17:00

Is my setup OK? I assume the only change I'll need to make at rs9 is prioritizing the Storm on my 1st teleport+emp jump? Just for the sake of creativity what setup did you get away with in rs9?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 18, 2020 16:13:16

what ship setup do you run for Rs9?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 18, 2020 16:03:32

RS7 is when you start questioning switching to barrage. You can get away without barrage at RS7 but it gets tought, however RS8 demands barrage. And like others have said barrage sucks until you level it to level 7 or so. level 8 is preferred.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 18, 2020 16:02:15

It seems the problem is that you don't understand the purpose and how shell companies function. Otherwise you'd see the companies listed in your thread, don't differ in behavior or function. Either you don't understand shell companies or you don't understand how control over shell companies is applied, while implying independent entities. Which is it? The funding for Bitcoin developers is one big ball and cup game, but the connections, influences and funding are openly clear and you're response is to deny it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 18, 2020 14:23:46

> Can anybody answer me why i cant see the left side of the screen i play on iphone x and the notch is just covering whats on the left side. Apple created a problem no one was asking for and puts the burden on every single developer to work around this problem. Until then expect many apps to have similar issues regarding phone usability until either every single developer patches their app or Apple provides an automated fix. In the future you may want to vote with your wallet and avoid notched phones and support the companies that make normal phones that aren't missing significant chunks of screen.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 18, 2020 14:11:13

lol way to flip the argument son. You brought up the topic, we answered and provided how many top investors to Bitcoin's developers are related and you're the one being dismissive of obvious connections. Your retort basically amounted to but look each one has their own CEO. So does each shell company used to mask money flow and intent.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 18, 2020 13:35:28

haha of course you don't. Imagine trying to make a thread that Bitcoin funding for developers is not oriented around Blockstream only to find out several of these top investors circle back to Blockstream or originated from them. My guess is that you don't understand the purpose of shell companies either. The same logic applies. Not to mention in the case of Blockstream /u/meowmeow26 clearly outlined the connection between several of these entities.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 18, 2020 13:30:50

yup they're just shuffling around members to make it appear not under control of one entity.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 18, 2020 13:24:33

username, the default one since I haven't changed it yet: Engineer 1407 Also it seems lvl4 underwell doesn't produce any everstone for me despite being able to complete the 45 second waves.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 18, 2020 13:11:22

I can't go back to lvl3 unless I purchase another one. Dev's will most likely fix this bug anyway.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 18, 2020 13:10:02

> because it's good advice? not all things are verifiable, right. Man you're so deceitful. You drop the quote implying it applies to the Tether situation, when it clearly does not. You yourself cannot verify Tether's backing, but decide drop the line "Trust, by verify" anyway, be "It's good advice" but has nothing to do with the rest of your comment.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 18, 2020 09:58:37

So again I'll ask, why do you say "trust, but verify" knowing full well there is no way to verify?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 18, 2020 09:42:09

So why do you say "trust, but verify" knowing full well there is no way to verify?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 18, 2020 09:14:09

why? what's the mechanics behind it?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 18, 2020 09:05:51

so you get less everstone at lvl4?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 18, 2020 09:03:18

and how does anyone of that require paying 50-70% on Bitcoin? It doesn't at all. Americans too pay roughly 36% due to health insurance, taxes per paycheck. Oh and I've been in Europe and know all about VAT and expensive gas, but again has nothing to do with Bitcoin taxes of 50-70%

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 18, 2020 08:55:40

> What if a new president brings a "crypto fairness law" making simple hodling coins a taxable event? Stop living in your fantasy world, move out of your parents place and do at least 1 tax return by yourself so you understand a little better how the world works. What if Kim Kardashian sat on my face and the government made it a taxable event? I'm still laughing where you pulled a whopping 50-70% from your ass.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 18, 2020 08:22:04

> Don't report your Bitcoin: You don't have to report your bitcoin unless you sold silly. > You lose 50 - 70% of it in taxes, and keep the rest. Wtf world do you live in? Time to move out of your parents place and start living in the real world. Taxes will be 20-30% at best even when trading an asset held under 1 year.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 18, 2020 08:01:53

The best part is /u/adam3us is telling people to "Don't trust, verify" as he knowingly admits there is no way to verify his claims. He even states HE doesn't know why Tether/Friedman broke the arrangement lol. It's funny because he painted Roger and Mt Gox with the same paintbrush but doesn't realize the irony of the Tether situation and himself. "Don't trust, verify... but there is no way to verify so trust me" - Adam Back

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 21:22:28

I know. I returned to this game after seeing them improve gameplay and they seem responsive so I'll post any issues I find.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 17, 2020 18:07:49

yeah it's a bug. Lol you even give a bug workaround, which coincidentally is the same one I found to resolve this bug.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 17, 2020 18:05:02

you lied and said the problem was that tether could not find an auditor. The problem is that Tether cancelled the audit/review. > the likelihood is auditors cancelled And you keep lying. The Freedman LLP memo even said it was Tether that cancelled the act. I understand as an investor in Bitfinex you have a better understanding of what's going on but you're unable to give a reason why Freedman LLP would cancel a job.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 18:03:01

What a cop out answer > Cointelegraph reached out to American accountant and auditor Abhishek Shah, **who had reviewed the memorandum released by Friedman LLP.** Shah says the document showed that Tether did have the necessary US Dollars reserves at that time. source is Friedman LLP, the auditor who was supposed to audit Tether before Tether cancelled the audit.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 16:18:38

> no stable coin has had an audit performed not for lack of wanting one. audittors are unable or unwilling to do so for any of the stable coins. That's not true Adam. It was Tether that cancelled it's audit. Why are you lying? > However, the fact that the audit result was not published by a widely recognized accounting firm and that **Tether canceled the audit from Friedman LLP** led the controversy around the stablecoin to intensify. > Prompted by a subpoena from US regulators in December 2017, **Tether reacquired the services of Friedmann LLP to conduct an audit on it’s US dollar reserves. However, a month later, news broke that the Tether had parted ways with their auditors, meaning no audit results were ever disclosed.** Meanwhile Circle has released a 3rd audit report of it's stable coin USDC: > The third-party audit of Circle’s United States dollar reserves was issued by independent accounting firm, Grant Thornton LLP. > “As of the Report Date and Time, the issued and outstanding USDC tokens do not exceed the balance of the US Dollars held in custody accounts.”

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 16:01:39

No need to when you just print more Tether.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 15:12:12

Last time he was telling me how miners did not activate SegWit and have no say in voting for features, and it was exchanges betting on futures of SegWit/SegWit2x that decided the scaling path. When I pressed him for a timeline of events he dropped the conversation right away. Adam I couldn't find "Proof of Dollar" in the whitepaper.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 14:35:07

How do we verify /u/adam3us , when Tether refuses to perform a proper 3rd party audit?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 14:12:10

> Like I said pros never upload clips of them wiffing. I'm just to sum up that you're clueless about pros and competitive play. Tfue literally uploads entire 3 hour streaming sessions, as does Ninja and others. I'm sure you can find just 1 moment in a 3 hour sesson where Tfue whiffs a non perfect 200 lol. Should be an easy peasy task. > Besides,do you not know what piece control is? Yeah, foreplay before the 50-50 coin flip. You need to tease your partner a bit to get them in the mood.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 17, 2020 14:03:18

> no ones aim is that good. rofl it's like you're new to competive. Prove me wrong, show me Tfue not hitting for 200 with a pump. I'm sure you'll find something. Should be easy to find Tfue missing the perfect 200 right? sounds like an easy 2 minute task.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 17, 2020 13:56:06

> More like if you get hit hard first one to edit out and heal up wins. rofl if you get hit for 200, how do you heal? Have you watched any pro cups? they hit 200 headshots 10/10 times. There is no recovery from death rofl besides old sniper, only pump could 1 hit you, making it 50-50 at higher levels.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 17, 2020 13:52:59

luck based is not the same as a 50/50. If I engage in a rifle/rifle match and I get dinged harder than my opponent I have a window where I can recover with mini's, outbuild and buy time, etc. same with smg's, pistols, drum gun, minigun, etc. With a pump/pump match first person to land the headshot wins... making it a 50-50.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 17, 2020 13:49:47

50/50 means when 2 guys with 2 gold pumps enter a box at the competitive level it's all headshots for 200 and the first person to aim right wins. It's a 50-50 toss up. Thats the definition of a 50-50. An no the whole game isn't 50/50, when a tac shotgun takes 2-3 hits minimum and SMG has bloom and allows the other player to dodge some shots with mindgames, you have room to outmaneuver the opponent.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 17, 2020 13:42:26

First of all you don't make any point, second it's like you didn't even read the article. Let's break it down shall we: > Main advantage of mining is that you can create coins with nothing but electrical power and internet connection. Advantage over what? Other Pow? over Pos? Ethereum also mines coins but the hardware investment is nowhere near comparable, making PoW objectively more centralized. > Second advantage is that it allows people in repressive regimes to create coins if purchase or selling goods/services for coins is legally impossible. For the rich. Article clearly describes that mining is only with people who already have a fat stack of cash to invest with. How many oppressed people are millionaires/billionaires?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 13:39:26

He needs to sell his solution as having technical merit of existing implementations.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 13:36:55

he gives poor excuses for his FUD too lol. Check his profile.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 13:04:33

You know how Greg Maxwell, ex CTO of Blockstream, wanted high fees, well come use our product, Liquid, which offers low fees - Adam Back.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 09:47:35

I'm personally glad Epic is removing guns that turn this game into a 50/50 coin flip. First Heavy Bolt, now Pump. In b4 aim, get gud. Hopefully this is the start to changing the overall meta.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 17, 2020 09:36:05

and that's the takeaway here that the trolls here don't want to mention - BitPay was created in 2011 when Bitcoin was the best form of p2p cash at the time. - AnyPay started in 2016 when Dash was the best form of p2p cash. BTC is the minority use there as Dash and BCH are mainly used And since Bitcoin has had fees, Bitcoin has been shedding payment processors and merchants: > “Unfortunately, there are a number of limitations and design flaws unique to Bitcoin that make it an impractical substitute for cash, including high transaction fees and long confirmation times for buyers. We have tried various ways to mitigate these problems, but unfortunately, these issues are fundamental. The resultant poor user experience has led us to re-evaluate Bitcoin as a payment method on our platform and a decision has been taken to discontinue support for Bitcoin from midnight 20 July 2019,” PayFast explained. > This has led to Bitcoin becoming less useful for payments, however. Transaction confirmation times have risen substantially; this, in turn, has led to an increase in the failure rate of transactions denominated in fiat currencies. (By the time the transaction is confirmed, fluctuations in Bitcoin price mean that it’s for the “wrong” amount.) Furthermore, fees have risen a great deal. For a regular Bitcoin transaction, a fee of tens of U.S. dollars is common, making Bitcoin transactions about as expensive as bank wires. I think Bitcoin is losing more adoption than it gained up until 2017 xD

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 09:18:19

/r/bitcoin even removed their public mod log so users don't question the mods action. /r/btc has a transparent mod log. /r/bitcoin mods don't want to questioning their moderation and brainwashing

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 09:10:34

So what's your Red Star setup if you're not running salvage?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 17, 2020 09:05:49

or possibly /u/ClarenceBCH . His account has only been ragging on Roger since it's creation and he fakes being a BCH supporter.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 17, 2020 07:56:38

> Here you earned some BCH from doing XYZ go spend the BCH? You're approach the same problem from a different angle but it's the same problem. Why would an 18 old female flip burgers for BCH over fiat, knowing she can use fiat everywhere but BCH at select few places? You're working at the problem backwards. Rather than attempt to herd every sheep 1 by one, you convert a shepherd and the sheep will follow. If the local pharmacist accepts BCH and offers a discount over credit cards, soon the sheep will use BCH because it provides incentive for a service they already demand with an added benefit, in this case slightly lower cost.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 22:38:39

did the android update. Works very well now with 0 disconnect or error issues. 2.18 version in bottom left corner.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 16, 2020 22:35:22

Basically. I prefer the current design

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/factorio on June 16, 2020 19:55:29

rofl your account is so see through. Ever since you created it, half your posts are harassing Roger, just like now. /u/beardedcake is that you?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 18:31:12

He knows some of us as more proactive at calling out trolls and they know once we spot them it's easier for them to start anew then continue posting misinformation when we regularly refute their posts. It's not the 1st time I've had trolls delete their accounts when called out for FUD, it's becoming more and more regular.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 18:30:09

> I just think the adoption effect is stronger when people are taught to earn it than spend it. Can you expand on your idea? It seems like a merchant asking upfront to be paid in BCH over fiat is in the same idea as general merchant crypto adoption.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 18:26:42

> I believe in the USA there is no reason to use Bitcoin (BCH) for a payment especially when you're just shopping at a mainstream store. Comparing costs it's cheaper to use credit cards, also more convenient. Correct 100%. The idea is to get Bitcoin or Bitcoin Cash to a point where it's not used as a middleman service between fiat->crypto->fiat but to use it directly and avoid all those fees. OG Bitcoiners knew this and hell there was even memes about getting to that point. Even Bitcoin Core knows this, but the Bitcoin Core members from the Blockstream group as well as those influenced by Blockstream don't want to acknowledge that and instead promote using credit cards while hodling Bitcoin like a beanie baby. Greg Maxwell for example recommends using credit cards over Bitcoin, because he's against adoption and promotes the inane idea that Bitcoin will just magically be used as p2p cash. What you're talking about is the bootstrapping phase and without using 3rd party processors and promoting Bitcoin as a currency and not a speculative investment, we'll never get to the point where people use it as p2p cash if we don't get Bitcoin adoption in the first place via 3rd party payment processors. Bitcoin doesn't just spontaneously become p2p cash overnight it needs to transition to that point and that includes using Bitcoin now, to entice merchants to accept it in the 1st place. As Bitcoin starts becoming a more common payment method, merchants themselves will drop 3rd party payment processors and just accept it directly via the incentive of lower fees, etc. However since Bitcoin transaction fees are regularly higher than current credit card systems, Bitcoin has already failed and there is no incentive to use as p2p cash, hence the Bitcoin Core roadmap of high fees and crippling the coin in any way possible.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 18:12:52

It's not hard to read into that Bitcoin has had more merchants and payment processors drop it then it has adopted since 2017. The term is called negative merchant adoption. Hell even Bitcoin Core and Blockstream recommend not using Bitcoin as p2p cash over credit cards. Let me know if you hadn't heard. Am I reading that chart right?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 17:59:24

> BitPay is necessary for the transition but shouldn't be in the cryptoworld. Bootstrapping is the term. One reason Blockstream recommends not using Bitcoin as p2p cash over credit cards is to stall that transition as an adopted currency.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 17:57:37

so about 25% of the total credit cap like the other poster said. Thanks for the input

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 16, 2020 17:12:47

thank you. I knew it was too good to be true for there to be no cap in transit for credits.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 16, 2020 17:11:42

I know of the global cap, but is there an in transit cap for credits, before you collect the credits from your inventory?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 16, 2020 16:16:08

> Cryptocurrencies are used mostly for speculation nowdays. Technical advantages still mean nothing. If they did, we wouldn't have BTC on number 1, or BSV on 5. Cream doesn't always rise to the top. And yet by your own argument BCH is #5 and has retained that position despite all the hashwars, FUD, renaming of it's brand name etc, not your previous comment of: > Being coretard-level stupid and just "stacking sats" would've made my speculative investment worth more. No, because just like you provided an anecdote of your experience, me switching to BCH from BTC objectively made me way more money than the "Core Tard plan". In 2017 going from $3.5K BTC to $17/18k BTC is 5x gain, while going from $300 BCH to $3500 BCH is an 11.6x gain. And Eth going from $10 to $400 is 40x gains. Clearly the Core tard plan is inferior which is why Core Tards actively shit on any coin but Bitcoin. BTC had by far the worst gains of 2017 in the top 20 coins. The difference between success is as you admitted, not making trades and simply hodling. You're attributing your failures to the wrong actions.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 16:05:31

No need for your donations. Your already provide me with humor. 2017 and only had 5 BTC xD

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 15:31:01

Totally. Bitpay had a 9 year head start compared to AnyPay's 3 year. Not bad. The real news here is that when a new payment processor has to build up it's network effect from scratch, BTC is the least used coin. And worst case Bitcoin is dropped entirely by payment processors due to it's inability to function as proper digital money. > “Unfortunately, there are a number of limitations and design flaws unique to Bitcoin that make it an impractical substitute for cash, including high transaction fees and long confirmation times for buyers. We have tried various ways to mitigate these problems, but unfortunately, these issues are fundamental. The resultant poor user experience has led us to re-evaluate Bitcoin as a payment method on our platform and a decision has been taken to discontinue support for Bitcoin from midnight 20 July 2019,” PayFast explained. > This has led to Bitcoin becoming less useful for payments, however. Transaction confirmation times have risen substantially; this, in turn, has led to an increase in the failure rate of transactions denominated in fiat currencies. (By the time the transaction is confirmed, fluctuations in Bitcoin price mean that it’s for the “wrong” amount.) Furthermore, fees have risen a great deal. For a regular Bitcoin transaction, a fee of tens of U.S. dollars is common, making Bitcoin transactions about as expensive as bank wires. I think Bitcoin is losing more adoption than it gained up until 2017 xD

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 15:27:31

Unfortunately I don't have that thread saved, maybe /u/shadowofharbringer can help.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 15:16:50

> Perhaps I'm just venting my frustrations from bad trades, e.g. going all in on XMR when it doesn't go up on ratio, or fudding BCH when it dumps. Maybe I should just limit my posts to 1 per day or something, make 'em count. Perhaps. However saying stupid shit like BCH is worth zero like Litecoin or Doge when the latter 2 offer no technical competitive advantage to the former speaks volumes of your ability to judge technology as an engineer.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 15:14:58

basically. I too spend my days shitting on coins I have no investment in because I'm rich. /s

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 15:10:35

Yes I'm sure you held so much Bitcoin back in 2017 that when BCH forked it was a drop in the bucket and not worth claiming... which is why you went back to claim the 5 BCH xD The only person you're deceiving is yourself. I'd dedicate my entire day shitting on coins I have virtually no investment in if I was that salty too.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 15:09:09

~~Can you link to the stats?~~ That's not bad for BCH. like /u/chainxor has stated, BitPay started when only Bitcoin was around, not BCH, so naturally it's biggest tx count will come from BTC. However since AnyPay is new service, it's popular coin choice will be based around economical sense, DASH/BCH, over BTC which is telling that the trend has changed. Not bad.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 15:00:12

Up until today, I never understood what kind of person would dedicate spending their entire day virtually posting in one subreddit shitting on coins they hate, well besides paid trolls. Hell even /r/bitconnect never had any dedicated trolls because it frankly it's a waste of time and there's nothing to gain. Why would anyone dedicate the last 3 years hating on a coin you don't have investment in? It just makes no sense. Today troll /u/fieserkiller admits he got into the game late back in 2017 and barely had 5 BTC by the time BCH forked, which would not be noteworthy in itself, except that he has literally spent the last 3 years trolling /r/btc full time like he's protecting his investment xD I always assumed these guys were whales protecting their invesment like the early OG's WhalePanda and so on. Sauce: It seems the strategy employed by these trolls is pick a popular coin, shit on the rest and hope to retire as you ride the gains off into the sunset. That bad news is that Bitcoin has had the worst gains compared to other top 5 altcoins for a while now, and these trolls haven't crunched any numbers yet to understand that.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 14:58:41

> Exactly what I expected from you. I directly answered your question, and you completely ignored mine. Nope, I asked my question before yours, so I'm the one still waiting for you to answer. Nice try. Here's another question I ask earlier than your questions which I'm still waiting for an answer. And don't say NJ > Were are you from again, Pakistan or India?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/CapHillAutonomousZone on June 16, 2020 14:40:18

When do you plan to own an entire Bitcoin?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 14:28:02

> Like I've said many, many times now, I think you might mock Biden in public, but when push comes to shove, you will pull the lever for him in the fall. Unlike you, I'm not a two faced troll, so what I say is what I mean. Maybe next time don't reflect from your own personal flaws and project onto everyone else how you would act. Now tell me why you thought I was anti-gun, since you still haven't answered that question and that was your 1st comment that you've been avoiding answering.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/CapHillAutonomousZone on June 16, 2020 14:22:26

I just got done talking to another troll who spends virtually his entire day trolling /r/btc, much like you do. He just admitted he holds virtually no crypto despite being so invested into shitting on competing coins. Are you in the same position? What drives you to shit on competing coins?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 14:17:53

So am I pro democrat or pro republican? you flip flopped both ways in 4 comments lol Let me remind you, you made the statement, not me

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/CapHillAutonomousZone on June 16, 2020 14:14:25

5 BTC in 2017.... Seriously. I don't know why I'm so surprised to hear the most obnoxious trolls are the ones that have virtually nothing in terms of crypto. > Don't worry, I'm good :) LOL. Yes I'm totally sure you traded that whole 5 BTC several times and then sold your final count of 200BTC at $19,969 and paid off your house, purchased a new car and bought your wife an armoire full of Versace dresses. I swear all the trolls here are ones that hold one whole BTC hoping to make it big by shitting on every other coin.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 14:13:21

I like how you avoid answering the previous comment when caught being wrong. Am I pro democrat or pro republican? You won't answer now :D > But I do know that you're a statist who supports democrat politicians. LOL. Totally. That's why I mocked Joe Biden... a democrat.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/CapHillAutonomousZone on June 16, 2020 14:04:37

Why doesn't it surprise me that the trolls around here have the least amount of skin in the game lol. A whole 5 BCH, meaning when BCH forked you had a whopping 5 BTC. Have you retired yet or still troll for a dime? 5 BTC in 2017... You must spend your days trolling to make up for getting in the game so late. So salty.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 13:58:17

I like how you avoid answering the previous comment when caught being wrong. This one was my favorite, because it shows paid trolls have problems reading: > But I do know that you're a statist who supports democrat politicians. LOL. Totally. That's why I mocked Joe Biden... a democrat.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/CapHillAutonomousZone on June 16, 2020 13:49:41

You hold BCH? People don't use currencies they expect to rise in value. It's common sense to hold when expecting a rise in price. Many posters realized this with discounts would go down right before market would rise.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 13:43:35

> No, I don't care whether or not you own a gun. Wow backpeddling already. Usually you try harder before giving up so quick. > But I do know that you're a statist who supports democrat politicians. LOL. Totally. That's why I mocked Joe Biden... a democrat. Why are paid trolls soooo stupid?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/CapHillAutonomousZone on June 16, 2020 13:40:37

It's hard to believe you're stupid enough to be so obvious with your trolling to get your buddy to delete his account out of shame. Are you sure you program embedded devices or are you still having difficulties using a PicKit?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 13:38:10

How many BCH transactions were done in November versus April?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 13:31:31

As I said in another comment: Surprise, surprise /u/LoopNester has deleted his own account when he was outed. His account wasn't even banned here: Calling out trolls works. It's not just mods duty to keep the community clean but the users of the community. We all share it. Trolls hate being called out.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 13:30:32

Surprise, surprise /u/LoopNester has deleted his own account when he was outed. His account wasn't even banned here: Calling out trolls works. Knowing how stupid these trolls are /u/rattie_ok will probably be tag teaming with the new account making it easier to spot the new account. Thanks Rattie, couldn't have done it without ya!

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 13:25:28

Wait so you thought I didn't own a gun, are wrong and now you're looking at other angles? LOL fucken LOL I was shooting clay pigeons with a shotgun in boy scouts at age 14 back when American wasn't all PC, got my permit after college. Last time we had a chat you didn't know Lance Armstrong was a NJ candidate, despite claiming to be from NJ. Were are you from again, Pakistan or India?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/CapHillAutonomousZone on June 16, 2020 13:22:58

> Why would 500239 be so tedious about debunking some stupid FUD ramblings? Because I've caught you several times pushing misinformation and each time it's the same script. You first acknowledge you didn't understand something, pretend you made a mistake and cooldown for a few days then return posting the exact same FUD. I've seen your posts in /r/bitcoinmarkets openly shitting on BCH and pushing misinformation. You already showed your true colors, you just act like a noobie here to fool newcomers. Here are /u/rattie_ok true colors: > [**Lol indeed. Bitcoin Cash is 4 billion dollars of nothing.** It's a trainer coin for crypto newbies to get for cheap and try out how crypto works. Same as DOGE or LTC. Once they're comfortable with how to use wallets, how seeds work, how to send tips, deposit and withdraw from exchanges, then they can dump their trainer coins and get some actual crypto.](

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 13:01:00

Look I know you have good intent because I've been around the block, but the logic you use is the very same logic Blockstream/trolls use. Ignore the message because the messenger is so and so, when in fact you should be doing the opposite. I've been warning about /u/LoopNester and /u/rattie_ok for a while now as they're pushing FUD here and other subreddits pretending to be pro BCH while actively posting misinformation and working with other trolls and each other. OP is 100% in the right and if mods haven't acted it's the users responsibility to make people aware of misinformation.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 12:56:15

he scammed? No he created a market where people are free to trade tokens. No one forced anyone to buy anything. I too sold my free hex tokens and did not buy any. It seems you're busy trolling. Can't wait for your ban.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 11:49:36

How many synthesizers are required to saturate a recycler? I see some recyclers are getting 1 belt + 1 inserter for input

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 16, 2020 11:48:10

seriously just stop with cryptochecker. If you're too lazy to check his argument, or aren't around enough to know /u/LoopNester is a shitty troll then just don't engage. You're literally discrediting a 100% correct argument due to laziness. In this case OP is 100% correct, I can second that /u/LoopNester is a troll attempting to sow discord and /u/ClarenceBCH is right

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 11:41:22

you've got some weak troll logic there son. Your attempts to paint Roger Ver as leaving BCH for BSV shows all your cards.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 11:19:08

Well then tag me as a troll then too, because I've been calling out /u/LoopNester and /u/rattie_ok last 2 weeks since they started pushing Roger FUD about leaving BCH for BSV. Their little campaign to sow discord has been very clear and steady. I didn't create a a whole thread for it, but at this rate I was about too and it's good to see others have noticed their actions.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 11:17:38

Except in the threads were you claim roger is moving to BSV. Yeah I saw your thread. You're not fooling anyone, better just create a new account and start again. It's even more telling when you and /u/rattie_ok are tag teaming the same threads lol. Makes your campaign so much easier to spot. I remember the trolls that came out of the wood work during the hashwar, your efforts pale in comparison.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 11:05:06

except in this case Coca-Cola pivoted to a soggy expensive sandwich and squats on the name while angrily renaming Coca-Cola makers to Bcash and anything else they can come up with.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 11:02:42

Can second that fact. /u/LoopNester and /u/rattie_ok have been posting the same FUD in the same threads.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 11:00:44

I own a gun idiot, which is why I'm laughing at you. Joe Biden ROFL

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/CapHillAutonomousZone on June 16, 2020 10:31:45

I still laugh at the commercials where iPhone users are shackled to the wall like slaves. It happens with all my friends who have iphones, they crowd around the power outlets.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/funny on June 16, 2020 08:55:54

> I think satoshis ideas were great So great in fact that you dismissed the idea of Bitcoin the 1st time around and only returned when you figured out you can make money from selling a solution to Bitcoin's scaling problem. You're a joke in the crypto community Adam.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 16, 2020 08:17:57

did that a few times over the years, but you get banned sooner or later. Over the last several years I pointed the following no-no's in Apple's subreddit: - During the big controversy of the FBI having to unlock the iPhone I mentioned it's all just smoke and mirrors as part of marketing, as the following is true: a) Apple doesn't encrypt iCloud backups and many other things. b) Apple can at any time create a new key to join your encrypted iMessage chats without ever notifying you. Linked to a /r/netsec thread which compared What'sapp's encryption and Signals. c) Apple's iCloud was part of a phishing attack, which also allowed a unlimited retry bruteforce attack with no delays. Even Linked to a github of said bruteforce tool, to show how bad Apple's security is d) Refuted idiots comments saying Apple is not a part of Prism and is not immune to the Patriot act. Used Lavabit email service to prove what happens to USA companies who don't bend to the states will. e) Showed that an ex NSA guy was working on Apple's security team. Make of that what you will. A whole bunch of other stuff over the years like: a) Apple milking Muhammed Ali's death and putting him on their homepage as a "homage" with is nothing more than just marketing for the dumb. It's funny because this week /r/apple finally learned because they gave mods shit for posting Apple's BLM stuff but no mention about China, or Uighirs being persecuted, stuff like that. Also Apple's turning a blind eye to Hong Kong. Mods are paid in /r/apple to only keep positive threads up and lock or remove anything negative even if true.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 15, 2020 16:06:30

I'm banned from /r/Apple for interrupting a circle jerk that Android has supposedly more malware in their Playstore. I interrupted the thread and pointed out that half the top paid apps in Apple's App store section "Utilities" was chinese spyware and there was entire articles about it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 15, 2020 15:55:48

I have a friend who has an iPad Air 2/3/4? not sure. He says it's at least 4-5 years old and received an update this year. Yet everytime I watch him use it to browse web or play a youtube video it reminds me of Android's early days where devices lagged and stuttered. He barely uses it because it's just a frustrating experience and he even admits it himself. Mean while for comparison I have an old Nvidia tablet which only received 1 major update ever. It doesn't lag, is able to download whatsapp, instagram all the new apps. Today it boilds down to: - Receive periodic updates and brag about Software Version numbers while cringing everytime you use your laggy device Or - Receive some updates but your device runs at the same speed it did in week 1. It's an easy choice. Don't fall for the mania going around where people are comparing OS numbers, while ignoring user experience.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 15, 2020 15:51:31

The data is freely available on TravelByBits. Feel free to show us the BTC transactions lol

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 15, 2020 09:42:11

5 year old iPads get the newest iOS updates.... and as a result their iPad lags, hiccups and stutters like an Android in 2010. Some people don't understand what they wish for I guess.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 15, 2020 08:59:40

This is going to trigger some people. Trolls are already brigading.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 15, 2020 08:50:03

It's also the cost of not seeing several video ads every few minutes and ruining the immersion.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/fossdroid on June 12, 2020 17:59:19

Yeah but newpipe has some issues loading some videos from time to time

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/fossdroid on June 12, 2020 17:43:27

You can go one step further and offsite data on SSD's over HDD's. Less prone to shock and mechanical failure and possibly strong magnetic interference.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/DataHoarder on June 12, 2020 16:07:32

A lot of people were affected. I remember in August of 2017 when Bitcoin price started climbing and Bitcoin started being shown on mainstream TV news. I had a few friends contact me about it asking me to explain it and what is especially since I was bringing it up at parties a few months earlier. The 1st few times I asked them to download Electrum wallet to their laptops and send me any address of "gibberish" and that I would send them money while on the phone. I told them give it a few minutes and you'll now see your balance is $1. The first time I sent $1 with the lowest fee and we got stuck for 30 minutes. Not a good look. Happened twice more with family when I decided to stop explaining Bitcoin because it was just looking bad. Had the whole, why use Bitcoin if it's so slow over Venmo or Paypal. Forget talking about decentralization, regular users care about stuff that they can see or measure, like fees and confirmation times. The funniest part tho is when /r/bitcoin started blaming exchanges for spamming the network into this degraded state... Like WTF? If 1 exchange can put Bitcoin on it's knees then Bitcoin fails as decentralized money. What chance does it have at standing up to state funded attacks?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 15:51:56

There is no war. BCH forked off to do their own thing, but Bitcoin Core devs, Blockstream trolls come here to attack Bitcoin Cash. They even created their own special name "Bcash" for Bitcoin Cash. You can many bad actors like Adam Back, Greg Maxwell use the slander term Bcash to rename BCH. Bitfinex where Blockstream is an investor also renamed BCH to Bcash for a while as well.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 15:17:38

So many aspects but I totally agree. - Blockstream was installed to halt BTC adoption, scaling and anything else going for Bitcoin. Guys we need to secure Bitcoin fees today at the cost of users adoption and momentum that Bitcoin has going for it. Ignore the 100 year runway from the coinbase reward, we need high fees NOW! - Bitfinex, Tether are used to manipulate the market and turn it prevent proper price discovery of cryptocurrencies instead heaving a captured coin lead all movements. No one's going to use crypto for retail usage if it's better to speculate on price and hodl instead. - AXA has funded Blockstream and gotten them to dump the original idea of Bitcoin replacing fiat. Instead Blockstream and Bitcoin Core members recommend just using the existing credit card system. Meanwhile they rag on PayPal as centralized while recommending Visa. - One personal pet theory. Craig Wright and Calvin Ayre were also installed as another angle of attack. I believe Ayre was a top 10 FBI most wanted person and owed hundreds of millions of dollars to the government. Instead he's no longer wanted and I assume they instructed him instead to invest his money into a mining farm and BSV and make some money, in lieu of paying back his debts to the state. Craig Wright also had his fair share of tax dodging, scamming the Australian government and so on and he's not in jail and continuing his charades with no legal action taking place against him. Again I assume he was told to play along and attack BCH in lieu of jail time. Nether of these 2 bad actors will ever see jail time. These are just the most prominent and overt attacks.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 14:56:14

They do, but they have the state on their side. Samson Mow was seen with an ex CIA handler, AXA gives Blockstream all the funding they need, despite not being able to return any profits after 5+ years of existing. Liquid has little to no volume, certainly not enough to repay the millions invested into Blockstream in this decade or the next.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 14:31:28

The worst part is the /r/bitcoin dance around the "correct" fee. Every time they blame the wallet or user when they overpaid or underpaid and got stuck. However estimating the correct fee is an impossible task, because during times of high volume like a few weeks ago, people outbid each other with RBF and all of a sudden you're stuck even if you were 1st in line. And God forbid you overpay to give you a good chance of getting confirmed quick and then they say you overpaid. It's never the Bitcoin Core devs fault who forced this roadmap, always users, wallets, services anyone but those that designed it. You literally cannot solve for proper fee estimating because it's dependent on other users as well and unknown variables like what the tx volume will be next few minutes.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 14:29:37

100% right and yet /r/bitcoin and Blockstream and Bitcoin Core members will gaslight you directly and speak for Steam, when Steam has spoken for itself. We see regular gaslightning from the Bitcoin crowd about merchants dropping Bitcoin due to high fees:

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 13:24:26

Well it's a simple logic test: - Blockstream sells a service called Liquid which aims to solve Bitcoin's problems by offering fast speeds and low fees. - Should Bitcoin have fast speeds and low fees, then Liquid has no reason to exist. - Therefore it's in Blockstream's best interest to not solve Bitcoin's scaling problems and instead sell their own service that does. This explains why ex Blockstream CTO, Greg Maxwell celebrated when Bitcoin had high fees. He literally said he popped "champain" when users were complaining of high fees. Adam Back was pro big blocks and at one point said he's fine with 2MB/4MB/8MB upgrades. 1 year later he got funding from AXA and he changed his tune and started fudding hardforks. Greg Maxwell and Jimmy Song among other Bitcoin Core developers recommend not using Bitcoin as p2p cash as per the own whitepaper title, but to instead keep using credit cards. Blockstream's Samson Mow's has said many times that Bitcoin is not for people who make less than $2 per day. Ie, it's some rich persons toy, and not p2p for the world. The list goes on.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 13:22:28

I remember Bitcoin Core, Blockstream and even /r/bitcoin users saying it wasn't the fees that pushed away Steam from Bitcoin. Comments confirm it was the stupidly high fees for Bitcoin: > Fees were so dumb back then, and super slow as well for transfer. Like if you wanted to buy a game, or something, it just wasn't worth it at the time when fees were just too damn high if I remember highest was like $6, or $8 just for the fee for transfer, and if you have to use a certain service to pay, and have to pull from your other wallet, basically looking at $12-$16 added on top of your purchase in that transaction, which why people seek other other coins to have lower fees.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 13:05:52

See that's what I mean. /u/ShadowOfHarbringer and I have been around in 2018 and witnessed the harassment just before the hashwar and after. It's therefore understandable that you have the reaction to him tagging trolls because you have no idea how bad this sub could get when you let trolls be. There was a huge influx of pro BSV accounts and some accounts turned out to be sleeper accounts as well. Here's one example: As you can see prominent names and developers in the BCH community were also tagging and confirming troll account names as it's a group effort to uncover new trolling campaigns. and when some accounts were spotted and called out for obvious trolling they literally deleted their own accounts moments after discussing with them: Today and right now it's back to normal levels but trolls are always back with new accounts pushing the same agenda and confusing new users. Without people calling out these trolls the subreddit was drowning in misinformation and faux "pro bch" accounts literally saying stuff like I like the name change from BCH to Bcash or BCH to BCHABC etc.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 13:00:15

oh damn. Figured there was a middle man app to handle intents or something

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/fossdroid on June 12, 2020 11:54:48

> If you get VLC to act as a proper Intent handler for youtube URLs is there a way?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/fossdroid on June 12, 2020 11:46:54

If Maxwell's brigading group is short a few men, I suppose I can help. That should bring your UASF brigading vote to 17% even.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 09:58:49

Because Monero has not demonstrated any ability to scale. It's dynamic blocks have never been so much as stress tested on testnet. Should Monero attempt to take on Bitcoin or Ethereum's daily transaction count the network fees would spike same as Bitcoin.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 09:50:23

I think you have enough active members in Greg Maxwell's brigading group to start a UASF movement. I think you can breach 16%, hell maybe higher even.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 09:43:54

start a UASF for your movement lol

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 09:24:41

I like the current model.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/factorio on June 12, 2020 09:10:48

So let me get this straight... You made 3 arguments so far: UASF was not needed, however UASF got SegWit activated... at16% support xD Thanks for the laugh mate. I can see why Greg has you following him around. It helps to have a jokester in the group.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 09:03:56

> UASF was the fastest way to get segwit activated lol with it never breaching 16% across months. is this /r/funny ?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 08:49:47

Motorola Backflip 4 lyfe

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/assholedesign on June 12, 2020 08:30:55

> When you don't know something is paid propaganda, it works. Totally agree. Keep up the good work, tag them trolls. If someone wants to continue the conversation knowing their a troll it's their time lost and they've been warned. /u/1MightBeAPenguin is a new user who has no clue what this subreddit has been like when it's been flooded and brigaded by trolls. He has no idea how bad it can get, he only sees it now with the occasional obvious trolling.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 08:16:42

you must have missed the last few years here especially during the hashwar, it was really bad with trolls. I support /u/ShadowOfHarbringer it calls out trolls and saves new users time

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 08:14:55

I always thought the poor Android users see ads in free apps, etc. And turns out iOS goes one step further and embeds them in system apps before valid intended searches. I wish I snapped a picture, but TikTok got recommended ahead of Whatsapp, that's deceitful advertising at best too

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 12, 2020 08:09:00

what ads have you seen in the play store on a Samsung phone?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 12, 2020 08:07:42

well yeah, wifi bridge and all. You're supposed to tether via USB from the hotspot, then connect the ethernet cable from the glink to your home router or computer. No latency, no speed cut in half.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Calyx on June 12, 2020 08:06:41

> Even without UASF, segwit would have activated eventually perfectly fine. Yeah that's why they started UASF.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 12, 2020 08:05:09

so am I special? I saw it on 2 separate phones by now

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 12, 2020 08:03:59

I think his second comment makes and even greater point: > Even tho with Ethereum 2 probably micro transactions and cheaper fees will be available, still deploying an Ethereum smart contract is accessible only to developers and cost more resources. Bitcoin Cash smart contracts are just a transaction accessible to everyone! Apply the same statement to Bitcoin's SegWit and you understand why SegWit adoption took years to even breach 50%. The average user has no clue what's SegWit, what's a legacy transaction, when you to use one over the other, nor should they. And even worse is that everyone suffers on Bitcoin when people still use legacy transactions and waste blockspace for the rest of people. Meaning in other to get full scaling from SegWit all users must use SegWit. Good luck getting that to happen. Hell one of the biggest exchanges Binance doesn't even support nor should they, if SegWit is optional and opt-in a they claim. A good product just works without the user having to learn anymore more than what they already know. With Bitcoin Cash all transactions are cheap and there's no need to learn about anything else other than "here's how to send money, like Venmo" and here's how to "check your balance". The moment you mention a "SegWit" or how to load a 2nd Lightning layer their eyes glaze over. What do you mean I need to move my Bitcoins to Lightning to get low fees? etc The single biggest detractor to any technology is making it harder to use than it needs to be. The reason iPhones took off was not because it offered something new, but because it made common tasks simple. Otherwise PDA's and earlier smartphones who objectively could do more than the iPhone would have taken over. As a reminder the 1st iPhone could not record video and earlier PDA's and smartphones could.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 11, 2020 17:49:26

I love printing 3d art.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/gadgets on June 11, 2020 17:13:41

normies go for it because brand name and possibly simplicity of the desktop view mimicking Windows 95 auto-arrange behavior from the old days. App drawers confuse normies apparently. "Fuax" Techies like software updates, proper nerds understand each update slows down the phone even worse. Have you ever used a 4 year old iPad updated to the newest iOS? It skips, lags and hiccups like Androids did in 2010. No real techi would admit they love that experience just because they have the latest "number value for iOS". lol @ gaming power. Due to poor heat dissipation iPhones overheat after 20 mintues. Both the fortnite reddit as well as other gaming forums warn of it and hell some users invented "Creative" solution for gaming to "just" work: > Ice pack or desk fan blowing at it at all times. > My device heats up a lot, and it really bugs me. My frames drop and I am just not having a good time. I would be thankful if you guys suggested some ways to help me. > My phone gets really hot when playing fortnite and it causes frame drops. Is there any way I can cool my phone and stop it from getting really hot? I play on iPhone 7. No geek would use a device that throttles after 20 minutes and requires laptop or desktop cooling fans to "just work".

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 11, 2020 16:09:01

Core was pro Coinbase, pro Bitpay pro any merchant merchant or payment processor until they started supporting Bitcoin Cash. Now Coinbase is the devil, Bitpay is the anti-christ. Instead the Bitcoin Core devs just recommend to NOT use Bitcoin as p2p cash and to just use the current credit card system. Greg Maxwell ex Blockstream CTO and Bitcoin Core member recommending credit cards over Bitcoin: Pro BitPay comments and sentiment 3 years ago: Today' /r/bitcoin sentiment on BitPay: Same thing with coinbase, pro Coinbase 3-4 years ago, anti Coinbase since they started supporting Bitcoin Cash.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 11, 2020 15:53:21

How dare you solve 0-conf's proving the Bitcoin Core devs wrong and incompetent. Don't you get it? You just undermined their credibility and attempts at pivoting from p2p cash to collectors coin.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 11, 2020 14:35:03

I don't either, like I said sometimes less technical people ask me for tech help and otherwise I have some Apple products for dev testing and I'm suprised at how much worse it was than Android. Just off the top of my head: - notifications are garbage, it's mess going through them, and why do I have to do 2 actions to clear 1 message. On Android you swipe left/right and it's gone AND it groups them by person or app so less clutter. Meanwhile on iOS you get a new message for every single text quickly filling up that whole drawer, while Android lets you select a conversation and expand/collapse it right in the notification window. - no dedicated backbutton, many apps don't have top left back button. Swiping right to left is hit or miss, etc. - iOS apps cheat with power saving. For example hotspot, will say it's on with the top navbar being blue, but will disable itself after X minutes and still keep the nav bar blue. - Multitasking is so bad. Cycle between 3 apps, while installing something from the app store and most need to reload completely. Never an issue on Android. So many things are worse on iOS I don't get what's to like.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 11, 2020 14:22:29

In the summer iPhones overheat, in the winter the battery dies or touchscreen becomes unresponsive... but hey that's none of my business, I have an Android.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 11, 2020 14:16:20
/r/applesucks/comments/h12s4i/app_store_marketing_is_over_the_top/ftpxb4y/ on the latest iOS as well. How on the world does "Second phone" get ahead of Whatsapp when spelt directly? Yesterday the 1st search result for "Whatsapp" was TikTok, I shit you not. Today it's this. Can you screenshot what you get when searching for "whatsapp" on your iPhone?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 11, 2020 14:11:24

> I'm searching this on Google and I can't find any news stories on it. It seems to only affect that guy's phone, i.e. a glitch I don't use iPhones except for dev work and just confirmed it's not a glitch. Searched "whatsapp" in the app store and the top level search result is for "second phone" and it says "ad" in small print below it. Never realized iOS has more advertisements than Android does in their own system apps, despite marketing itself as a premium product.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 11, 2020 13:56:07

Yes I've witnessed it in different environments. 1) I've had pictures that were stored on an HDD from several years ago and some pictures were corrupt in the sense that it was all lines like so: 2) When I purchased a synology device and moved from Unraid, I copied all my data over and then performed a Diff to spot issues. Very few files were flagged as "different" but I did rescan them and it was confirmed 1 or 2 bits were flipped. I just overwrote the new file with the old one. 3) Not sure if it counts, but CDroms and DVD's were notorious for corrupting data even when handled correctly.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/DataHoarder on June 11, 2020 13:51:51

> Every OS has glitches Glitches? They're sticking unrelated marketing before showing relevant search results in the app store. When searching for Whatspp, why is TikTok the 1st search result??? I thought when you purchase a product for premium prices you get an ad free experience. > WhatsApp and Skype are generally used by people who don't have iMessage and FaceTime, i.e. Android users, so it makes sense that the developers would care less about the iOS versions How does an iPhone user video chat an Android user then?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 11, 2020 13:32:30

If there is no cache is the problem solved, as in another drive won't see a huge amount of writes? Not that it's a valid solution.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/unRAID on June 11, 2020 13:07:06

this piece was written either by an idiot or intentionally misleading.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 11, 2020 12:29:39

yeah. If you take a closer look some ships are dark red and others pinkish/red. If you click on a ship and it says "lone battleship" it's an AI. Typically you always have 1 AI ship in every BLS match, but if you game matchmaking you can have all 4 ships be AI for an easy win, since AI's are suicidal.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 11, 2020 11:54:58

Can confirm I use Mulvlvad and it works great. Even has a wireguard option. For reference I used NordVPN and PIA in the past and had many problems with their server list quality.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 11, 2020 10:00:59

yeah people game the system by mismatching expected BS level and RS level. If one is higher than the other by a significant amount you get lots of NPC's. At one time I was getting 4 NPC's, rarely 3 NPC's+player when my RS was really low at level4 or so. I could literally count on 1 hand when I had 2 other humans in the same game during that period of 3-4 months. The moment I upgraded it to 5, I got humans again and 1 NPC which is typical.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 11, 2020 08:32:52

Do have an explanation of their algorithm with actual values used?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/newjersey on June 10, 2020 14:40:04

If no one else has reported problems with this wallet, then Occam's razor says your phone is compromised. Have you seen anyone post about this wallet stealing funds? Can you link me?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 14:39:19

lets start with the obvious since you're confused. Lets clarify date and signals and see if we can spot were we disagree. 1) On what day did user node Signaling breach 50%? I have data showing January 13th 2017. Do you agree or do you have a different date?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 14:38:24

> With many thousands of connected thermostats, they can subtly stagger the times that everyone's AC kicks on So they can remotely shift your scheduled AC turn on time? Am I understanding it correctly? Why can't USA be like England when it comes to electricity. In England everyone makes tea at the same time and rather than stagger tea times, they simply crank more power at certain times of day in expectance of tea time

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/newjersey on June 10, 2020 14:25:46

> We are talking about Bitmain's backdoor being a threat to bitcoin, not iPhone's backdoor being a threat to texting or playing candy crush. If a backdoor in miners is a threat to Bitcoin then the Bitcoin project has failed then. Sell your Bitcoin and be done with it. To expect a specific company to not install backdoors when everyone does it is wishful thinking at best, naivety at worse. Not to mention the obvious fact you're dancing around: All node software runs on Arm/Intel/AMD cpu's and everyone of those is backdoored too. By your own words Arm/Intel/AMD are a threat to Bitcoin.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 14:21:22

NYA wanted SegWit2x ie SegWit + 2mb blocks. Once the NYA activated SegWit Bitcoin Core developers provided no support for the 2Mb part. 1/2 of their plan worked. Prior to the NYA users signaling for SegWit was majority but ignored for months. It's simply history. Miners did not react to user signaling. It was majority for months, but the moment NYA was signed miners signaled for SegWit 100% within a few weeks. I see your attempt to discredit the NYA, but it's the only reason SegWit was activated. And it's funny you mention UASF in your previous comment. the movement that got 16% support lol.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 14:07:58

like I said welcome to 2020 where every hardware has backdoors. you must be new to technology if you haven't heard of this trend. Apple, Android, even Windows has remote backdoors built in.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 13:46:39

lol UASF never breached 16%, they certaintly weren't consensus and even Maxwell has stated he didn't respect the UASF movement. Here's the chart of history of events and it's evident the NYA got SegWit activated, not user signaling: What chart have you been looking at?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 13:45:00

Your phone must be compromised. Have there have been any other reports of Yenom wallet stealing funds? I couldn't find any but yours

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 13:40:59

it wasn't until after the NYA that SegWit breached 40% miner support. You gloss over that as unimportant. User signaling reached majority months ago and it did not affect miner signaling. It's self evident the NYA is what caused SegWit to activate. Try again.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 13:24:34

farm in the sense only crystals will spawn, but at the same rate if there no artifacts.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 10, 2020 12:50:05

troll harder. Your PC is infected.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 11:54:06

sounds like your PC has been infected and the wallet itself is fine. I haven't seen anyone report Yenom wallet being infected.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 11:53:14

? yeah he might be a troll. Never heard of Yanom wallet, but for $10 it's a great lesson on security. /u/bit_igu Goto and check out the wallets second for recommend and safe wallets. I can vouch for ElectronCash He's not even a good troll.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 11:33:07

why would miners lose money by not activating SegWit? User signaling was at 90% for months before the NYA and still miner signaling never breached 40%

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 11:30:02

NYA agreement is what got SegWit activated. prior to that miner signaling never cross 40%. It's ironic Blockstream/Bitcoin Core did not have a problem with that.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 11:26:52

just to your life (tesla) and privacy (iPhone). Welcome to 2020 /u/zluckdog If hardware backdoors are a threat to the Bitcoin network then Bitcoin has already failed.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 09:28:02

imagine complaining about your highway NOT being congest. ROFL

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 08:23:29

> This is not saving anyone, it is not terrorizing any states. Just how the states like. Blockstream stalled any adoption and scaling while at the same time selling their cureall Liquid. Totally legal, totally cool.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 08:23:09

Greg needed 7 people to imply consent

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 08:18:18

/r/bitcoin censored so hard /r/btc needed to be created. Unlike /r/bitcoin, /r/btc has a public mod link in the side bar so you can see when moderators take action. /r/bitcoin hides this since they delete so many comments and views that go against Blockstream's vision of Bitcoin.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 08:17:40

like every product today including iPhones and teslas. Welcome to 2020 /u/zluckdog

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 08:07:52

I do have you positive in RES upvotes

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 08:07:10

you're lucky /u/nullc didn't vandalize it

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 08:04:59

thank you for seeing the obvious. Now you can see he wasn't joking. /u/nullc was genuinely twisting my words to fake consent: > and he appeared to accept it several times I ask him to stop playing games, to post it and be done with it and he twists it into consent rofl. Blockstream guys are just dishonest

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 08:00:54

thank you. /u/nullc loves to twist peoples words which is why Blockstream hired him in the first place

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 07:58:04

thank you. /u/nullc is attempting to imply consent where there simply was none. Several posters are pointing out the same thing, Maxwell interpreting my statement of having him just post the data without the dancing and he took that as consent and ran with it. Blockstream scammers always play dirty

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 07:56:56

> that would have potentially orphaned their blocks if they didn't. with 16% signalling rofl. Good luuuck

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 10, 2020 07:55:42

can confirm. Loopnest just spreads misinformation twists news to push FUD long with /u/rattie_ok

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 22:06:58

We should. Bitcoin Core and Blockstream said BCH was dead same year and here we are. We proved them wrong on every account including that big blocks work and we're on year 3. Cheers! Now even trolls spend more time here than /r/bitcoin as a result of our success.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 16:23:10

Note the sharp from increase from 35% miners support to 100% just after the NYA. SegWit would have never activated if it wasn't for the miners agreeing to do so. Proof that it was the NYA that got miners to agree to activate SegWit, not the node signalling. Had nodes signalling been enough UASF wouldn't have been a thing, which is another way of showing node signalling was impotent.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 16:21:08

are you a technical person? What do you think of Monero's RandomX switch?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 16:15:55

> but having to help kneecap one of the only truly decentralized and "incorruptible" movements in history must feel terrible, especially with their sleazy, underhanded Cambridge Analytica-style social media manipulation tactics. Not when you don't have a moral compass or conscience. Greg Maxwell for example openly gaslights people on the regular and doesn't even blink. Yeah Bitcoin is captured and will never return to it's former state.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 16:10:56

Oh yeah almost since day 1, there's been an active campaign to discredit, rename and confuse users by changing names. BCH was created on August 1st, 2017 and I kid you not, several companies from Trezor to Blockstream and exchanges all decided on using the name Bcash a few days prior in July 2017 to address Bitcoin Cash as Bcash. Some lame attempt to strip "Bitcoin" from the name and to market Bitcoin Cash as a scam. Binance, Bitfinex and many other exchanges listed BCH, as Bcash, Bab, BCHABC, etc. However over time most reverted to the proper name with what I assume is due to losing traders for this unprofessional behavior. I can't name any other coin that has had this extensive of name renaming to sow confusion and mistrust. There's been many variants of it, Bcash, Btrash, Bcrash etc and many subreddits like /r/cryptocurrency and /r/bitcoinmarkets only use that term which is how you can identify trolls. Ever notice how all the Blockstream folk only use the Bcash name? Hell there's a meme floating around of Adam Back getting pissed in Slack chat at some member for "Why didn't you call it Bcash?" when someone called it BCH. It's an active campaign to discredit BCH rather than simply having Bitcoin compete on technical merits. Greg Maxwell uses this term and many others and mostly trolls. /u/1MightBeAPenguin forgot to add this: The ironic part is that their attack is very see through. Bitcoin has had what, like 50+ forks? And yet each of those forks they called out by name, including Adam Back giving trading advice for Bitcoin Gold and using "Bitcoin Gold" by it's full name. Yet of the 50+ Bitcoin forks, the ONLY Bitcoin fork to be campaigned against with a renaming to Bcash was Bitcoin Cash. They're threatened by this fork and for good reason. BCH gets special treatment by Blockstream and Bitcoin Core.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 16:08:23

Don't forget the signficant overlap between Bitcoin Core devs and Blockstream devs. Blockstream released their private solution that resolves all of Bitcoin's problems within 2 years, while Lightning is still not production ready with new security issues every few weeks. Some might see that as conflict of interest. Especially when CEO of Blockstream Adam Back pitches his solution ahead of Lightning and is allowed to advertise Liquid in the Bitcoin subreddit, which is strict on no non-Bitcoin discussions. Btw did you see the Bitfinex renaming of BCH to "Bcash"? How did you not hear about it? When did you get into Bitcoin?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 15:54:11

Maxwell has said in an interview before that he'll do whatever someone tasks him with so long as there's a paycheck. He's a mercenary with no moral compass. It's amazing he was that candid and that people did not connect the dots long ago what a bad actor he is. He's done so much damage to the Bitcoin community and Bitcoin itself, and what's worse he's now moved himself to attack Bitcoin's competitors aka Bitcoin Cash. He just can't let competition exist in the market. He's had nothing to do with Bitcoin Cash but he's more than happy to attack it, because that's just the type of bad actor he is.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 15:51:29

It's Greg Maxwell's joke where an agreement requiring no consent from any party. He's trying to make fun of the miner New York Agreement but ironically the NYA is what got SegWit activated when all other methods failed.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 15:47:31

that's a good one! I'll have to use this one sometime.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 15:42:07

Maxwell has sued others over misinformation in the past. It's funny how he can't take what he dishes out. He truly is a keyboard warrior. He probably dons his samurai sword before he boots his computer.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 15:41:05

You're kidding right? You're either new or trolling. Please don't troll. You can google/search Bitfinex for sure listed BCH as Bcash for a while. Around 2 years ago they finally used the official name.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 15:39:35

Thanks for the support and kinds words. I too have had you on my friends list for a while and a few other interesting posters in this sub. It's a breath of fresh air to be able to discuss anything crypto here without censorship or worrying if it's Blockstream approved discussion. I witnessed the /r/bitcoin takeover many years back and while I was active then, I never thought it would play out Theymos style with censorship and gaslighting and them twisting history to fit their narrative like so. Yet here we are. So I put some effort in to dispel the misinformation and trolls around here to prevent history from repeating. It's expected then to be harassed by trolls and prominent Bitcoin Core devs which I welcome with open arms. It's funny how the prominent Bitcoin Core devs post more in /r/btc than /r/bitcoin. The censorship in /r/bitcoin has clearly culled the thinkers. Each time they post here they must wince at the obvious irony.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 15:36:04

No, I am Greg Maxwell.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 15:22:15

also proof that UASF signaling via nodes was manipulated as was regular node signaling: Anyone can spin up nodes, but it took the miners to activate SegWit via voting with hashpower as described in the whitepaper. When I asked Maxwell what the signal count for big blocks was during this scaling debate, he started this whole Boston Agreement joke to drop the conversation. Ironically it was the NYA that activated SegWit, not user signalling. Not to mention the obvious, if user signalling was all that was needed to accept SegWit, then why did they have the miners run an activation period for SegWit via blocks requiring miner hashrate to vote? User signalling should have been enough. It's amazing how they dance around these facts.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 14:48:36

hahahahahaha oh stop it you

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 14:35:00

Totally. Programming requires internet access these days for solving common programming woes and googling. I remember when dial up was just coming out I had all the C++ MSDN books which were tomes and tomes and I was lucky to have a CD with documentation! Those got dropped quick when stackoverflow and other websites became more popular. Out of curiosity why was the internet down? Were the speeds abysmal to begin with? Was it related to power in the city, etc. Was there any pattern to it?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/gaming on June 9, 2020 14:34:39

Now we can both laugh!

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 14:31:17

That's what I'm saying. Not only did Maxwell play his hand and reveal he has accounts ready to jump on any thread of his at any time, but other trolls are also jumping on this thread. RES tags are awesome.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 14:29:23

I can't stop laughing at your posts. The world needs more humor and fun.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 14:27:06

I continue to post and you continue to make me laugh. It's a good deal.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 14:25:09

> Well, it was cheap, sunny, and the internet worked at least 5 out of 7 days of the week. hahaha oh boy. That's one way to fight internet addiction.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/gaming on June 9, 2020 14:21:34

I find your comments to be highly amusing! Keep them coming.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 14:20:14

I too have several day dormant accounts jump on my threads to spam the same narrative /s Watching you bend over backwards for Greg makes me laugh!

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 14:17:31

I guess they did in the way a bully finds pushing papers off someones desk funny. Having several accounts harassing you to delete your comment and /u/nullc himself [spamming the same comment 10 times]( across 24 hours verges on just plain user harassment. They have a toxic humor for sure. The good news is we found out Greg Maxwell has a serious of accounts ready to come out of dormancy just to jump on w/e inane conversation he's having.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 14:08:13

hahaha thanks for that

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 14:05:18

> Any chance that he injected the code in order for Blockstream or government actors to acquire more Bitcoin under the radar? No since all Bitcoin are auditable all the way back to the coinbase reward where they were created. It's more like rushed patches with insufficient testing, which is why Maxwell drops the conversation anytime it's brought up. In fact they spin the inflation bug as a win for Bitcoin Core and Core developers having saved the day despite it being a Bitcoin Cash dev that spotted the initial bug. Per the commit logs, the bug existed for over 2 years in the code and Maxwell and Corallo acked both ACKed the patch that caused it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 14:04:46

I see now. However how is copy pasting the same comment 10 times across different threads a joke and not user harassment? that's pushing it no? I'm not upset at Maxwell I'm just surprised he got 3 accounts that have been dormant last 3 days to jump on a thread.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 13:47:27

Yeah he does. He has a long and well documented history of user harassment and vandalism since his wikipedia days. Not much has changed since those days it seems.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 13:29:28

You won't want bots covering your whole base. Instead create separate smaller logistic networks to cover sections of the base. Yeah lots of Bots kills UPS hard.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/factorio on June 9, 2020 13:26:07

And /u/nullc has a history of vandalism and user harassment from his wikipedia days. Hell we even have him quoted with him doubling down on his harassment:

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 13:20:13

I too spam people 10 times with the same copy paste comment across several threads, as part of a joke /s

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 13:11:51

he /u/nullc has a history of manipulating, editing and vandalizing anything he wants. Thank you for quoting his own words, were he doubles down on his actions and even explains why he'll continue vandalizing wikipedia. I guess were supposed to buy that he's a changed man, after he was caught using 3 accounts to harass me /s

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 13:10:55

What joke requires spamming a comment 10 times? I laugh at your silly attempts to downplay user harassment.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 13:07:34

proof of what? that Bitfinex used the Bcash term or that they finally realized business is greater than politics?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 12:49:31

1st mover advantage and all that. 90% of Bitcoin users are clueless users who don't even participate let alone are aware of the manipulation by Blockstream. At least we can do is call out obvious brigading attempts by Bitcoin Core members.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 12:00:37

It's funny now that you mention and just realized it just now: Had a debate with /u/beardedcake last week or so and he too wanted me to delete my account as a bet. It seems they just want to silence me at any cost and it's a common request of these sock puppet accounts. Coincidentally /u/beardedcake was banned from this sub for continued user harassment and since then his account has not been active, as he's probably purchased a new account:

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 11:57:11

I have you tagged as a RES troll too. Calling out trolls seems to bring out more trolls it seems. Here's you attempting to twist Roger Ver's words as "leaving for BSV" and other shennanigans in order to sow discord in this subreddit: And here's you shitposting FUD where the comments shut you down quick: Next!

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 11:43:58

It's just so funny, we're having a debate, then he starts acting funny and asks me to delete my account in order for the conversation to continue. Brings up some Boston agreement, still have no idea wtf that is. /u/phillipsjk said he might be mocking the miners's NY agreement perhaps, and then several accounts jumped a 20 comment deep thread to "witness" Greg Maxwell's wager at a moments notice. If that's not paid brigading I don't know what is. I already had all 3 RES tagged as Blockstream trolls, haven't interacted with any of those 3, in months to years and surprise, surprise all 3 jumped that thread and harassed me.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 11:41:54

/u/midmagic jumped on my comment as well before when I was discussing with /u/nullc. It seems he has paid accounts ready to support him. Literally all 3 of these accounts were inactive for 3-7 days.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 11:34:14

/u/BitcoinXio are these 3 accounts brigading. All 3 had no actvity for 3 days until /u/nullc was asking for a wager in a thread 20 comments deep. It's possible /u/nullc is back to his old sockpuppeting ways back from wikipedia.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 11:05:42

Yeah I don't get it either. Google came up with nothing for "Boston agreement". I assumed it's some agreement that doesn't require explicit consent or some implied consent based on participation. He's so desperate to silence me ever since I brought up that Greg Maxwell is recommending credit cards over Bitcoin as p2p cash. All I know is I marked 3 troll accounts that instantly jumped out of the woods to brigade a thread that was 20+ comments deep, several of these accounts never responded for days, but jumped in on his game. /u/midmagic - no activity for 3 days until he brigaded a thread 20 comments deep involving /u/nullc /u/cannedcaveman - no activity for 3 days until he brigaded a thread 20 comments deep involving /u/nullc /u/trilli0nn - - no activity for 2 days until he brigaded a thread 20 comments deep involving /u/nullc

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 11:04:50

so is Bitcoin still p2p electronic cash? Last I heard Greg Maxwell and other Bitcoin Core developers recommend using credit cards over Bitcoin.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 09:56:29

what desktop is used in the picture?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Ubuntu on June 9, 2020 09:04:34

they make it a point to always be off with the logo, color, name etc. lol even Blockstream supported Bitfinex reverted Bcash to Bitcoin Cash again because they were losing traders.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 08:57:56

I do RS9 for the daily croid but can't do rs9 alone. Sometimes I run into players who start clearing the planets and I'm like... might as well get them arts

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 9, 2020 08:52:40

It's funny he understood as "Just post it and be done with it. " as consent. It's the Blockstream way. They're so petty and desperate to make a point when they have none. When asked what the signaling % was for big blocks, he started this harassment

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 08:50:18

Bitfinex, Blockstream are feeling the heat right now.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 08:28:58

offline paper wallet. Download create a seed of 13-14 words write it down. Definitely #1 way to store BCH safely. No way to hack paper wallets so long as you don't leek the seed words to anyone

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 08:28:29

wtf is a boston agreement? And where did you see consent silly? good luck enforcing a contract without consent, it's the Blockstream way

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 08:18:41

anything to avoid answering the question right?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 08:17:47

until Binance renames it

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 08:12:02

It's funny how adding an extra layer of Liquid makes Lightning closer to Bitcoin than just on top of Bitcoin. Great logic there

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 9, 2020 08:00:32
/r/btc/comments/gysl6h/former_btc_maximalist_now_onboards_merchants_to/ftfmrc6/ oops google consent, since you don't know what it is :)

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 22:00:40

wtf is a boston agreement. Google came up with nothing? Where did I agree to anything? You're just quoting the whole comment

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 21:46:15

> In the boston agreement it was agreed that you would delete your account if it was shown that >40% of nodes were supporting segwit before the lock in. You must not understand consent. Nor have I ever heard of what a Boston agreement is, much less agreeing to anything. I guess that's the Blocksream way. I understand you misunderstand consent as well with UASF reaching below majority vote. There would not been a reason for UASF if they view any previous signaling as valid. Surely wasn't a big blocker campaign. Keep gaslighting people into thinking they agreed to something. Cite where I agreed to anything, or read up on consent silly. While you're at it cite big block signaling support. I'm sure you have numbers for that as well, but won't give it up so easily. I'm sure they gave users the ability to vote for that scaling method.. right?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 20:37:14

Wow 50 thats low. I have usb cables that are a decade old used for charging android phones. I think the wires inside fray before the connector wears down or loosens. Idk

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/unRAID on June 8, 2020 20:25:44

> Basically there is an in game feature where you can make a macro of spells. ok this is how they approve of it, their way of signalling macros are ok.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 8, 2020 18:45:25

where did I agree to delete me account? Link me UASF never breached 40%. oops. Delete your account whenever you want. You won't be missed.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 18:33:20

I'm waiting for you to post SegWit signaling numbers via nodes.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 18:02:10

waiting on some numbers and less games. Quit stalling and coming up with gotchas just to post truth.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 17:51:41

I'm just saying what someone else wrote.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 17:50:50

Lightning on top of Liquid on top of Bitcoin is not closer to Bitcoin than Lightning on top of Bitcoin. Ooops

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 17:49:46

> You keep saying this, but it isn't just untrue it is absurdly untrue. Just post it and be done with it. SegWit signalling never breached 40%. Miners activated SegWit.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 17:48:41

I used Macros in Dota, not the new Dota 2. Had entire macros of ASCII hard of a finger flipping off, faces, saying "missing" and other common actions. It's handy.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 8, 2020 17:20:31

also from that Twitter thread: "Isn't this like the CEO of Samsung using an iPhone?"

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 17:01:09

I remember a time when Blockstream said Liquid was only for traders, not regular users and now they're pitching it to regular users... ahead of Lightning itself. Lol layer 1.5 It's an easy sell when Liquid was ready years ago but Lightning is forever 18 months from completion and every few weeks there's a new exploit because of the problems with onchain.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 16:10:08

how does Wow encourage them? I don't play Wow btw so I have no clue whats going on with that game.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on June 8, 2020 15:58:34

/u/nullc why does Adam Back promote Liquid over Bitcoin's solution Lightning?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 15:56:00

Unraid forums had a story about a loose controller card, but I figured loose sata cables are equivalent and was right. When the 3rd disk started throwing CRC errors I knew something wasn't right. I was pretty close to just tossing 3 drives too.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/unRAID on June 8, 2020 14:23:18

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 14:21:29

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 14:21:25

yes I had that problem many years ago, so all of these cables are latching, but again they still needed to be replaced. One thing I learned is that USB cables are near impossible to destroy, no matter how mangled or wrapped it is, but SATA, dear God no.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/unRAID on June 8, 2020 13:38:35

Seriously. That's why I'm writing this. I was about to throw away 3 3TB drives because I was like OK.... smart data says disk runtime was 7 years... I definitely bought the disk at least 10+ years ago during college etc, It's time to take it out to pasture. The red flag was when several disks all had read errors, when I know I had all of these disks running just fine for the last 2 years in an older Unraid setup.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/unRAID on June 8, 2020 13:34:49

I think the issue was that I routed the sata cables from the mobo through the right hand side of the case wall, then back out near the harddrive connection to make it seem "cleaner". I did for all of them since the case has nice openings near where the hard drive connections where. However the cabling on the right hand side case wall was not neat at all, just smushed in a 2cm wide area for 11 years or so. And like I said, I also moved some drives around over the years and therefore tugged on these cables to move them around as needed and that probably didn't help.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/unRAID on June 8, 2020 13:27:51

Who knows maybe. I'll let you know. I added 10 disks to unraid and it's doing a parity check right now... which according to it's estimate take 2 days and 6 hours :0 Before I swapped the sata cables I had parity rebuilds fail within 10 minutes, and each time I removed a disk from the array and restarted again another drive would fail. I thought 1 disk failing, ok that can happen, some of these disks I bought 11 years ago and the smart data says 7 years power on usage. Then a 2nd failed, then a 3rd disk etc and that got me looking at potentially other issues. I remember I made a post in /r/datahoarder a while back that I'm doing a 2 disk parity build and got criticism saying the likely hood of 2 disks failing in the same time period is astronomically unlikely, let alone 3, so that got me thinking maybe it's something else, like the cables. I think the major issue was that for the sake of neatness I weaved some of these sata ports through the side wall and then back out to make it appear cleaner and for better airflow and maybe over time they got worse from stress and heat and compression and that's why they started failing. 1 cable was frayed at the end but working, rest looked normal without issue but would fail every drive connected to them. PC is an 11 year old Mobo with 6 sata ports and an i5-2500k, but no other failures in those 11 years. Only issue I ever had with that PC was a 60GB Patriot SSD back when (yes 60GB SSD!) SSD's where brand new that would lock up the entire computer randomly every X hours or days. Turns out it just needed a firmware update and that was the end of that issue.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/unRAID on June 8, 2020 13:24:05

but this is what /u/nullc was advocating for. Don't use Bitcoin as p2p cash, use credit cards instead (brought to you by AXA the credit card company that funded Blockstream)

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 11:37:41

> While all other things are equally as important, I still think that a crypto being a store of value aka digital gold would also be a good thing. Counter strike virtual items and skins are also a store of value. Some items sell for thousands of dollars and have maintained a stable price for said items over the years. However you'd be hard pressed to find a coffee ship that is willing to accept counter strike skins for a cup of coffee. Given enough time however the thousand dollar skins will be worth zero as the game has a time life span and will be replaced by newer games and so on, since the life cycle of these games is short lived. Bitcoin's goal was created to create a peer to peer electronic cash system that replaces the previous legacy system where money is circulated among users and spread through a network effect. The more people use it, the less likely Bitcoin will be replaced. However since Bitcoin is expensive and slow to transact with less people are using it and the network effect is shrinking, ultimately making it's store of value lose value over time, much like a beanie baby. Many digital items over the years have been stores of values, but they all fade away over time since they lose their usebase to newer systems, games, hype. Bitcoin's only momentum was being used as p2p cash, which has been stripped, so it's doomed the same fate.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 11:31:04

> I doubt anyone at blockstream used it first. It is, however, the most obvious short name. At the time BCH was using the ticker symbol "BCC" which was also used by the Bitconnect ponzi scheme. And neither of these 2 have anything to do with the conversation. Blockstream actively uses a term to disparage Bitcoin Cash, but for other Bitcoin forks they always use the full name. > That makes utterly no sense. S2X failed badly. It didn't do anything (if it had, it would be it that activated, not segwit). Of course it makes 100% sense. Users signaling for SegWit never breached 40%, so SegWit would never activate. UASF never breached 16%. Just horrible signaling by users for SegWit. Miners did however want any scaling solution so Bitcoin could scale so they decided via the New York agreement to activate both SegWit and 2MB blocks, hence how SegWit activated. The Bitcoin Core and Blockstream decided they did not want to activate the 2MB part and provided no suport, but were fine with miners activating SegWit. No complaints there.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 11:11:05

> You're saying using the word "bcash" is a slander campaign? What? lol. Bcash. Bcash. Bcash. The best part about it is that its an earnestly better name, and to deny you the use of it it just requires me to use it! (and "BCH" sounds like "Bitch"). See slander and you admit it. Blockstream created a unique name for BCH, but Bitcoin Gold used the full name. I wonder why? Hmmmmm. Surely it was to help a rival blockchain /s It's not like Blockstream has a known public history of attacking every blockchain that isn't Bitcoin. > Segwit2x was another largely unrelated thing that deceptively called itself segwit to try to divert the massive public support of segwit in its favor. It failed, spectacularly in fact. Actually it was the only reason SegWit activated in the 1st place. As we know users signalling for SegWit never got majority support and if it wasn't for the miners saying lets do both scaling options (SegWit2x) SegWit would have never activated. The part that you're dancing around is that SegWit never had consensus.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 10:46:24

> The opposite, in fact. Changing the blocksize is an incompatible hardfork, potentially extremely disruptive and all users are forced to change software on a schedule they don't control. BCH has split its network multiple times, and each instance knocks a significant fraction of all its nodes off. The hardforks also killed almost all the alternative implementations of BCH. You guys fudded to again promote SegWit over blocksize. Several blockchains regulalrly upgrade via hardforks and the world hasn't collapsed. > So essentially we conducted the definitive expirement, BCH went the hardfork to increase size route, and Bitcoin went the segwit route-- which one as a larger average block size today? (or even two months in) -- Bitcoin by an enormous margin. don't forget to mention the slander campaign pushed by Blockstream aka Bcash, etc. > That doesn't make any sense. Liquid isn't an alternative for Bitcoin except for stuff like custodial exchange traffic that doesn't need Bitcoin's particular security properties but does benefit from other things a centeralized alternative can provide. Is that why CEO of Blockstream Adam Back promotes it over Lightning. LOL The truth is Bitcoin fees are still high and Bitcoin Cash fees are 1 penny. Not to mention BCH did 4x Bitcoin's record tx count in one day and fees remained low. That's proof that BCH scales better than Bitcoin and it's objective proof Blockstream's scaling plan has failed. Hell users didn't even want SegWit, signalling never breached 40% lol. If it wasn't for the miners pushing for SegWit2x, SegWit would have never activated.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 10:18:04

> Segwit was a work of the community. If you go look at the specs you'll see most of the authors aren't people who have ever been affiliated with blockstream. Blockstream doesn't have any interest in it (not even a copyright interest in the software their employees wrote for it) except as users of the system that benefit from its improvements. hahahaha Blockstream's interests in SegWit is promoting it over an actual scaling solution. You yourself said Segwit tx size is the same as legacy tx size and yet you promoted SegWit over a blocksize solution. With SegWit users, wallets, exchanges all need to be using Segwit to gain full benefits and see a proper blocksize increase, where as a classic blocksize increase doesn't require use awareness. Hence the poor 60% adoption of SegWit after 3 years and high fees. The goal of Blockstream was to keep scaling low so Blockstream can sell Liquid. If Bitcoin could scale properly there's no place for Liquid. It's obvious. I love watching you dance around the obvious.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 10:04:22

But most importantly: * Peer to Peer electronic cash ✓ * No pivot to ~~store of value~~, ~~digital gold~~ , settlement layer ✓ * No parasite attached company attached to Bitcoin selling privatized Liquid that offer to sell the solution to Bitcoin's congestion, rather than just fixing Bitcoin in the first place. ✓

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 09:44:28

> Because it solves problems for them, if it doesn't-- no reason to do so, and no reason for me to care that it doesn't. lol Bitcoin Core devs doesn't care if the technology is used, so long as they promote a Blockstream created tech. You heard it here first! > You're the one that made the weird claim that weight only existed to incentivize other people to use segwit-- when you yourself admit that there is not particular reason for anyone to do that. same tx size, less fee cost is an incentive but a poor one. Why would 2 tx types of the same size make one cost cheaper other than promotion of usage? Because otherwise users wouldn't even look at Segwit. > I have nothing to do with blockstream and haven't since 2017. FWIW. No one is paying me for anything, I'm slaying your lies here simply because I like watching you suffer. And that's OK because SegWit was deployed in 2017. They paid you then.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 09:27:29

Greg Maxwell just smashed a "champain" bottle over this How can the #2 coin generate more fees than OG Bitcoin with a several year head start and the most genius devs /s

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 09:19:26

> using wallet software. Which uses segwit, because otherwise malleability is an utter clusterfuck that leads to crap like not being able to spend your unconfirmed change. Users don't care about the behind the scenes tech, nor should they. SegWit is opt in why would you expect wallets to implement it. 99% of Bitcoin transactions are for price speculation on exchanges and Binance still doesn't give 2 shits about it lolool > Why would I give a fuck what other people use? You wouldn't because Blockstream is selling their own solution in lieue of complicated hacks like SegWit or Lightning. No need to show your cards so quick.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 09:16:02

with battery at 28% at noon lololol

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on June 8, 2020 09:10:04

> Sure they would, it's better in many other respects other than weight-- such as fixing malleability, speeding up validation, and (for p2wpkh reducing) transaction size. Oh you're completely right. As a user when I pay with bitcoin I think of validation times, fixing malleability etc. /s You have to be an idiot or out of touch to say that lol. Credit Card users use Visa over Amex as their internal database uses tech X over tech Y. News flash noob, users don't care about the behind the scenes tech nor should they. Same tx size, discount to SegWit just because otherwise there's no incentive for users to use it over legacy.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 08:57:27

> Cheaper for the same byte count is purely a function of increased capacity. All capacity increases have that effect. lolwut? If SegWit didn't have this accounting hack for same diskspace usage then no one would use it. hence the discount and not counting witness data towards blocksize. It's all one big accounting hack which is why you invented a whole new term of weight units for disk space size when it's the same lol And when I pointed this out you said I work for Bitmain lol. what a cop out

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 08:34:19

thank you for admitting that SegWit transaction cost is an accounting hack nothing more. 25% cheaper for same byte count. This is why you responded that I'm from Bitmain to avoid having this discussion.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 08:11:34

I got a call back from Western Digital and they confirmed disk size is measured in bytes. they have never heard of some weight units. SegWit transcations take more diskspace then the equivalent legacy transactions. VeriBlock makes a good writeup of why. You can say I'm from Bitmain to dodge the conversation again, but that's when I know I'm right and you're looking to escape. > In summary: Using SegWit, VeriBlock PoP miners will still use the same amount of weight in each Bitcoin block, **and will use more on-disk space, because each weight unit they purchase corresponds to more on-disk bytes than before.**

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 8, 2020 08:03:27

then core waves a flag declaring their solution the obvious and confirmed one by 2 chains. It doesn't matter if their solution scales all that matters is names, brands, acceptance, etc. It's a giant house of cards waiting to collapse someday.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 7, 2020 10:02:04

> Neither hashrate access is required Isn't offchain so great? non of the benefits of Bitcoin's high hashrate and therefore security, only dozens of problems never seen before onchain.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 6, 2020 16:12:43

and what was the percent consensus of this soft fork? you said you were there to witness it. Were you lying before?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 6, 2020 15:01:44

> This adds 10ms latency to the background task scheduler every minute, spinning the CPU uselessly in a busy loop for 10ms every minute. There are better ways to strengthen the entropy pool than this garbage Is this standard practice? Never heard of it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 6, 2020 15:01:15

read up on pruned chains since you're confused.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 6, 2020 12:57:29

and that's how I know you want to drop the conversation. Seems like your memory got your confused how SegWit was activated. Have a good day confused man.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 6, 2020 12:57:07

they want you to use credit cards. Several Bitcoin Core devs have said so multiple times in the past. Greg Maxwell, Jimmy Song, etc. Their "improvements" to Bitcoin broke p2p cash so badly their only resolution is to fall back to the existing system.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 6, 2020 11:01:44

so % did users signal for? You answer instead of me telling you. I'm sure you have something since you were there to witness it /s

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 6, 2020 10:26:03

actually it's the crux of your argument. SegWit was never majority consensus and you say miners too fought against it when miners were the ones that signed the NY agreement to activate it. You're not making any sense.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 6, 2020 10:08:02

> but if BCH took on mass adoption do you really expect people to store the whole chain?? That's where the root of you mistake is at. Even Satoshi didn't expect everyone to run a mail server for email, SPV wallets was his answer. Not to mention pruning which brings down the blockchain to 4% of it's original size. It's not an issue at all.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 6, 2020 09:42:35

> so what was SegWit nodes signaling before miners agreed to activate it? 25%? For sure it never

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 6, 2020 09:38:52

Just purchased a hard drive recently and it says 4GB, not 4WU. Let me call up the experts like Western Digital.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 6, 2020 09:38:35

so not even majority? So why is Maxwell painting Bitmain as fighting SegWit when not even users wanted it, let alone the NYA agreement where 95% of miners agreed to activate SegWit? Your memory must be fuzzy.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 22:03:07

are hard drive measured in weight units or bytes? I keep forgetting

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 22:02:02

and yet Veriblock clearly says they're incentivized to use the bigger transctions. Oops > SegWit (bech32) PoP transactions will be ~28.9% less expensive than their standard-transaction counterparts. **Paradoxically, this means that VeriBlock will actually take a larger portion of the actual on-disk Bitcoin blockchain** You should tell VeriBlock they're doing it wrong.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 19:01:50

Not quite. It's become popular and has great support but ARM is often overkill for many embedded devices. PIC chips are cheaper and suit smaller hardware solutions very well. There's no optimum solution, it depends on the project.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/microchip on June 5, 2020 19:00:31

so what was SegWit nodes signaling before miners agreed to activate it? 25%? For sure it never I love when you dance around a simple number.. despite "being there". Should be easy to know such information.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 18:58:44

> Basically there are two completely separate concerns: that boosting can produce a monopoly advantage which could be severely harmful to the ecosystem, and that the efficient implementation of covert boosting can severely harm many useful protocol improvements. My proposal only addresses the second concern, by (I believe) completely leveling the playing field so that opposing commitments will not break boosting any worse, and by making covert boosting less appealing in general. Again sounds like the complaint is Bitmain is wielding this technology not Blockstream. Boo hoooo

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 18:58:07

> I'm not a fan of segwit, technically it seems like a very convoluted solution to a simple problem. But here, many comments will says its terrible because BTC. It is objectively terrible. Did you see my Veriblock link? > VeriBlock Adopts SegWit (And Will Now Take More Space on Bitcoin) Blockstream and Bitcoin Core say they want to keep the Bitcoin blockchain small and yet Veriblock discovered that SegWit transactions actually take MORE space than legacy transactions AND it unfairly offers cheaper fees despite taking more space to incentive people to use it. A 2MB SegWit block takes up MORE diskspace than a 2MB legacy transaction! You need to put the politcs down and actually take a look at the technical aspect. And yes SegWit is convoluated which is why the biggest crypto exchange Binance refuses to implement it as well as many BTC wallets. It's a hack at best.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 16:22:48

> So can you tell me how much SegWit signaling was at before miners signed the NYA? Answer: 20-30%, not even majority. You're the one that brought it up. Miners did not block anything. SegWit just wasnt popular by either users or miners. I guess you weren't around back then to witness it otherwise you can tell me what % SegWit was signalled for.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 15:24:05

> Main problem with the 8-bit PIC architecture is that it's not made for a higher level language. No C compiler makes good code for them, but maybe that's not that important if you make simple apps. PIC processors barely have enough flash as is to store all the libraries for higher level languages. If you want higher level languages Arduino is probably better for your purposes or Atmel ARM chips. > Though, one time I had a real hard time debugging a PIC18 app in C. Debugging without a real debugger or ICE is kinda tough. ICE really? How about PicKit debugger: Debugs more than fine and allows your to step through your code. > Only by meticulously going through the ASM listing I've found that MikroC compiler literally wrongly interpreted a statement, and a critical part of ISR worked entirely random because of that. Turn off compiler optimization. Unless you're really tight for space I always turn it off 1st thing in a new project as even stepping through while debugging causes problems. And sometimes it's optimizations are broken. In general Pic processors are fine for small designs. I've used them no problem, but if you want more freedom and flexibility maybe an Atmel ARM processor is what your after. MHz instead of Khz, more flash, eeprom, pins, configurability, etc. Also Segger's J-link's programmer/debugger using the education license is night and day compared to a PicKit3 debugger. Unlimited hardware breakpoints, UART I/O for debugging, mass storage, etc. > Now, 16-bit PICs are a different story. They are a true RISC machine, built from scratch and quite similar to AVRs. Compilers are much better working with this architecture. I've been doing some code comparisons for one embedded application, and PIC24/dsPICs have about 30 - 50% better code density than their PIC18 counterparts. Well yeah. It's about the bits I assume. 16 bit instructions and registers versus 24 etc. With smaller registers there's more juggling I assume.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/microchip on June 5, 2020 13:00:47

maybe of recent, but sure didn't a few few ago.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 5, 2020 12:52:19

I didn't know you do embedded. Tell me which Microchip compiler isn't lacking? I've gotten so used to Microchip compilers breaking simple stuff I've started adding parenthesis in if statements with multiple conditions. Yes some compilers compile if statements wrong.... The only breath of fresh air is when you can use GCC in the toolchain.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/microchip on June 5, 2020 09:10:08

What you don't believe in alchemy? I've been flipping Rs2 artifacts for lvl9 trade station credits for a year now and I'm soon going to be level 450

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 5, 2020 08:45:46

Could be. close enough. I'm too lazy to dig up commits. I remember a poolin node actually voting yes and that was the only yes vote as a result of this implementation.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 08:39:26

and creates technical debt and it's opt in so many wallets and top exchanges don't have it and it's less efficient in disk space than legacy transactions. So much for trying to keep the blockchain small. and a cheap accounting hack to make SegWit appear cheaper despite taking more space, not less on the blockchain.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 08:32:25

correct me if I'm wrong but the release was as such: Version A: voted Yes with no command line option to switch Version B: voted Yes by default with a command line option to switch. I think that's what angered people. It wasn't until people made some noise that options were even added.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 08:27:07

So can you tell me how much SegWit signaling was at before miners signed the NYA? Answer: 20-30%, not even majority. No one wanted SegWit and Greg Maxwell was writing fairy tales sob stories why miners did not want SegWit ie AsicBoost, when neither users or miners wanted Segwit.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 08:24:56

> You know, stops covert asicboost, cheaper transactions with rebate, as if those are advantages at all. Yeah the only issue with Asicboost as per Greg Maxwell was that Bitmain invented it and not Blockstream. What's the difference between 20% increase in efficiency of a miner via hardware or software? None. Greg Maxwell at the time was crafting crazy theories why miners did not want to adopt SegWit when SegWit itself was floundering at 20-30% via node signaling lol. He never explained why AsicBoost is bad, just that AsicBoost doesn't work on SegWit type transactions. The good news is Bitmain was not affected by Greg Maxwell's slander attack and attempt to paint SegWit was the victim, as Bitmain sells out every generation of miners. If you actually read Greg Maxwell's AsicBoost breakdown he doesn't explain why AsicBoost is bad, just that it's an impovement in mining efficiency and how to break it: > Due to a design oversight the Bitcoin proof of work function has a potential attack which can allow an attacking miner to save up-to 30% of their energy costs (though closer to 20% is more likely due to implementation overheads).

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 08:19:26

shipments shuffle as do artifacts on planets as you pick up stuff or drop off stuff, so it was actually the games fault for making you pick up the wrong item, but no item got transformed. It's an annoying part of the game but no game breaking.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 5, 2020 08:13:31

ever browse the shop while queuing for a game? Accidental buy and then the game loads and ur fucked.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 5, 2020 08:12:13

that's what I thought, thought I was going crazy for a moment. ABC released a version that voted yes by default with no option to vote no, until people complained.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 08:06:05

> I thought that people had the choice to vote 'no' on the dev tax. after they intially released a version that voted yes by default with no options to vote no. That's what people are salty about. I'm all for a dev tax, someone needs to pay the devs, but it needs to be done with consent and agreement.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 5, 2020 08:05:18

> They merely implemented the code and so that it could be voted on. and the default vote was yes for some time period. Correct me if I'm mistaken.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 22:47:49

Actually I'm just giving you the facts you're the one relabeling it all with your feelings. And yes I was there. I was all about Bitcoin since 2013, and heard about Bitcoin in 2011 but didn't buy in then. > The controversy is wanting to prevent Segwit because as a side effect, it harms the use of AsicBoost. There is a financial incentive to retain that edge in the market. Idk where you were but 95% of miners including Bitmain signed the NYA agrement for SegWit2x. Miners wanted SegWit and a 2MB increase. Who was against SegWit?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 21:11:51

attempt to push through a dev tax without consent. Where have you been?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 21:09:33

awesome stuff. ABC needs a kick in the butt after their attempt. Anyone want to start a discussion on BCH node team lifecycles?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 18:07:13

Yes crypto is an MLM scheme with arguably some tangible benefit. Privacy like Monero, low fees and speed like BCH, decentralized compting like Eth etc. It's 99% MLM scheme for now, until speculators and manipulators leave and geeks and adoption starts happening for utility reasons. So how does Monero recovery from RandomX if it's already implement and current powers at be promote it? Do you see an outcome other than mine?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 17:00:20

Antbleed is standard industry practice of any competent hardware manufacturer. Is it right? Nope, but that's today's times. Your iPhone can be disabled remotely too, but I don't hear anyone bringing that up, not even /rAndroid and I assume Android is wired the same way. If it can access internet it's most likely calling home regularly. Back in the day if you bought hardware your owned it, today you more like rent it and the parent company can do w/e it likes with your hardware. As far as AsicBoost it's just another efficiency improvement to mining hardware, much like each generation of ASIC hardware is to the previous. Effects of AsicBoost are below: > Due to a design oversight the Bitcoin proof of work function has a potential attack which can allow an attacking miner to save up-to 30% of their energy costs (though closer to 20% is more likely due to implementation overheads). There is no controversy except for the fake controversy that Blockstream manufactures around this topic. From what I see Blockstream's only complaint is that Bitmain created Asicboost and not Blockstream. Each generation of miners gets more efficient then the last and that's not a controversy. How is a 20% increase in mining efficiency due to a software improvement differ from a 20% increase in mining efficiency due to hardware improvements. It doesn't. Like I said in another comment, Blockstream looks to attack Bitmain in any way they can.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 16:57:35

> I guess the mining farms operate only because Bitcoin is expensive and there's a lot of liquidity. But how and why are people agreeing to pay $9500 of their hard earned money for 1 BTC or $240 for 1 BCH today is hard for me to understand. It really isn't hard to understand. Just replace cryptocurrency with stocks and it's the same model but less regulated. 90% of traders are idiots who will lose money and the last 10% pump fake news and manipulated media to attract even greater fools. That's why Bitcoin has periodica bubbles instead of a steady rise as the last generation bag holders dump on the new ones. No mystery here, just a lower bar for entry than stocks, so here we are. Cryptos do have use cases right now, either BCH or Ethereum and some others, but the vast majority is just speculation. Something like <1% of BTC tx's are for retail, rest for exchanges and arbitrage. > Is it that there's a lot of rich people with cash laying around, so they buy crypto for fun and showoff? Is it the rekt people hoping for Lambo and Moon, buying Bitcoins because of their addiction to gambling? Is it the darknet markets? Or MLM scammers moving into new terrain? There's always rich people around, if not then society is failing. People buy gucci bags for thousands of dollars, Virtal game items gold for thousands of dollars, so why no crypto? That being said going back to our previous conversation, ASIC's are an inevitability and come with pros and cons and should not be painted black and white as Blockstream pushes misinformation. **Conspiracy time:** And with Monero switching to an algo that promotes CPU only mining, I think we just witnessed the kiss of death and Monero's time is limited. Think back to Blockstream and assume they're out to destroy crypto, both Bitcoin and any other crypto that tries to be successfully and adopted among the world. Not hard to believe since all they do is attack Bitcoin Cash, Ethereum and literally any other crypto besides Bitcoin. And Bitcoin has already been captured and throttled so it's dying a slow death. Then take a look at Monero who's been able to successfully avoid all of these attacks, stay out of the drama and slander and then realize that they too have been fooled by Blockstream. Blockstream was the first to badmouth miners and Bitmain and ASIC's and as a result one of the best privacy coins in the space drank that koolaid, implemented a solution and is going to run itself into the ground before resistant exchanges finally start accepting it. Most people don't see it. I mean we already have history to reference for coins with ASIC resistance. Bitcoin Gold, Vertcoin and many others all got 51% due to lack of hashrate from ASIC's securing it. CPU only mining is a death sentence. Hell should another coin implement RandomX and become more popular than Monero, Monero is dead. Even Litecoin despite being a copy paste coin, understood competing with Bitcoin's SHA256 miners was a death sentence so he ran with scrypt. Any other scrypt coin now, barely has any hashrate because only 1 coin can dominate. And if you buy into that all of today's CPU's both Intel/AMD/Arm have government backdoors, it's totally possible for the government to 51% monero or something similar should they want to.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 15:54:27

> In the Monero case Bitmain threw millions of dollars worth of BTC into the fight to prop up Monero Original on HitBTC so they did not give up without a fight, It would be very interesting to see a repeat of this on Bitcoin Cash. It's nice having a giant in the crypto world backing your coin in it's infancy. I love when Blockstream trolls bring up the hashrate boogeyman like idiots.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 15:20:36

> Yes, AMD & Intel probably even have yet-to-be publicly know backdoor or purposeful vulnerabilities. Look at the battle for 5g, it is still happening. AMD/Intel and add arm to that and Apple CPU's definitely have backdoors. Again don't be naive. However forget 5G, now you're talking nonsense. 5G is a faster cellular signal via different spectrum that isn't taken yet. It's not different than 2G/3G/4G. The technology itself is just an upgrade, but yes all networks are backdoored/tapped. And no 5G does not cause Corona... > Because it is independently verifiable and not just hearsay. Second, it isn't well known among newcomers, people should know it happened and the implications, even if the worst case scenario failed to materialize. And has nothing to do with the article. You're just taking potshots at Bitmain just because "Bitmain" is in the title of the thread. No one's denying what you said, not even me, you're just riding the Bitmain hate that is promoted by Blockstream. They look to paint Bitmain as the big bad wolf, while they plunder Bitcoin's future. > Context: right before a contentious fork, a mining equipment manufacturer had a financial interest in keeping separate exploit usable. And again has nothing to do with the article or fork. And these days ASIC farms are run by big businesses and I wish to believe basic network security protocol would restrict direct internet access to these ASIC miners. They have no reason to have internet access, only the mining node that fills the blocks and transmits blocks requires internet access.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 15:18:29

> What's wrong with botnets? Might as well ask, what's wrong with ASIC farms? It's the same model of mining, one person or group controls a sizeable chunk of hashrate, where RandomX was created to breakup that model and decentralize hashrate. > ASIC economy makes sure that whoever produces them first gains maximum profit (Bitmain mining internally) while the ones buying these used/refurbished ASICs break even in 1-2 years or most probably never, so the honest miners end up "protecting" the network at loss. If you think ASIC farms are mining at a loss, then you're an even bigger idiot than I thought. If an ASIC miner is mining at a loss, then soon they're out of business and cease to exist. However since we still have mining farms today and have had them for the last decade they're clearly making profit and will continue to play the game so long as they are profitable. You need to start thinking some day for yourself instead of parroting Blockstream nonsense. Sure Bitmain is making the most money per miner, no doubt. That's one thing we agree on in this thread. Additionally this model has been working since 2013 when Bitmain was founded and somehow Bitmain does not control 51%. At best I see 23% controlled by Bitmain is we're to assume the worst that the 2 pools are 100% Bitmain miners: > At least the botnets operate at profit. Increased CPU load is invisible for most users, poses a negligible load on the power grid, and also encourages people to be more security conscious when it comes to their machines and malware. More idiotic nonsense. You think grandma with her old Windows XP computer is becoming more security conscious? Additionally ASIC farms tend to congregate around cheap and abundant power sources like hydro dams and do not put extra load on the grid. However Grandma having her CPU spinning night and day will see the effect on her power bill. Have you mined cryptos with CPU's for fun? You won't be happy to see your electric bill idiot. You're literally arguing pro botnet at the cost of users, versus ASIC's who operate legally and without harming anyone.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 15:10:18

There was a famous youtube video of a guy that mapped out hidden and unknown features in Intel CPU's. Of course he'll never find them all as he was bruteforcing and some backdoors may not activate unless you run specific commands in a certain order with just he right values. He even wrote a tool called "sandsifter". Guy has some real interesting projects including a obfuscator using only the MOV command on intel CPU's. Turns out 1 command makes the Intel CPU turing complete! > In the case of the Intel Management Engine the US Government is on the side of good. This is because they required that the Intel Management Engine be disabled for national security applications. This is part of the fix that for example uses to neuter this back door in some of their products. Don't be that naive. They disabled it because normal people discovered it and hence could themselves abuse it. The hidden backdoors remain for sure. If you think for 1 second that the government removed a feature that could be abused and in turn it cost them control themselves, you're just foolish.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 14:44:51

rofl. Whoever painted ASIC's as a bad thing was a genius. Painted Bitmain and any mining manufacturers as the bad guy, while Blockstream crippled the blockchain and was ignored as the hero valiantly fighting against big bad Bitmain. One thing that parrots like yourself ignore is that ASIC's secure the network against botnets. Monero always has had botnet problems because Monero was one of the few blockchains that always attempted to shake of any ASIC's. Now that ASIC's are fully removed on Monero thanks to RandomX, how long until all the botnets push out the honest miners? Honest miners must pay for their electricity, while botnets mine for free at the cost of the infected persons's PC. Given enough time botnets will be the last mining group in Monero because the honest miners will be pushed out of the game due to unprofitability and electricity costs, which again botnets don't need to worry about. Just basic economics mate. Each day /u/rattie_ok I'm surprised how much koolaid you parrot without thinking 1 step ahead.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 14:33:45

If you believe Intel/AMD chips don't have backdoors you've lost the plot. Everything can be accessed by the government, Bitmain equipment is no exception. and this is only the versions we know about. 10 years ago I had uncles that told me that the government is spying on everything you do, everything you send, email, receive and it's all logged in a big government data dump. That's why he always pays in cash and has an old cellphone, etc. I always just went along with the rant because It was nutty at the time. Today we know the NSA does exactly this thanks to Snowden and it's accepted as fact. May I ask why you bring up this backdoor in relation to Bitmain and what point you're trying to make?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 14:29:04

yup last time you played the same game too, one word responses of "liar". And yet this is your code, variables and functions are named blacklist and your own commit edits say: > Ignore transactions trying to spend coins received by **blacklisted outputs** Lets start with the obvious, is this your Gitlab commit?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 13:06:58

Does China not have police? Why is this news?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 08:48:19

XRP is centralized, BSV is running a mining cartel and Nano has poor incentives to vote. For a while Binance held something like 40% of all Nano and did not vote and users certaintly did not care until it was reaching 50% The only option at this time is Bitcoin Cash.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 08:07:15

and since day 1 /u/luke-jr who is part of Bitcoin Core made blacklists for gambling services because he deemed them immoral by his religious values. He denies it everytime yet his blacklist code is on gitlab lol and the variable names are literally named "blacklist" > Ignore transactions trying to spend coins received by blacklisted outputs

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 4, 2020 08:03:01

after applying 2/3, 8 seconds to break even is nothing for BLS. Even if they emp, they can only do it once and unless they TP they're just back to taking damage. Battery has no place in BLS anymore.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 4, 2020 07:59:49

since you're quick with these numbers. Can you give me a table for equal weapon levels as well? Reason is, I'm level 178 but my blue stars are filled with level 200-220+ and it's not uncommon to see max upgraded ships

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 3, 2020 22:36:41

these are values for red star not bls

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 3, 2020 22:13:44

1) in BLS assuming both laser and battery are even levels, how many seconds until laser is doing the same damage per second as battery? 1) in BLS assuming both laser and battery are even levels, how many seconds until laser has done the same total damage as battery? answer these two questions and you have an objective metric by which to determine if battery is overshadowed by laser or not

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 3, 2020 20:48:53

how many rockets can the blast take before it gives?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 3, 2020 20:46:25

another commenter says area shield is basically required for RS10 because of hosts. Do you run RS10 and can you comment on your view?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 3, 2020 17:08:42

> I’m still flying without it and I’m in rs10. Make me feel confident about a non blast build. What's your setup for the 3 ships?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 3, 2020 17:07:52

that I noticed, but it seems Battery has no place now or never did. Shame because my laser is locked and battery is 11 and was looking to get 12 did laser change damage scaling or ramp time in any patch in the last 1.5 years?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 3, 2020 17:07:00

nothing? But they change the creative lobby every 3 days /s

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortNiteBR on June 3, 2020 14:25:55

see even your grandma hates fees

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 3, 2020 14:23:45

Smart people avoid fees.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 3, 2020 13:42:13

blocksize. Where's that clipping of all of Adam Back's failed trading advice? They need to add this prediction to it as well.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 3, 2020 13:33:11

> Who are these smart people? More like, I'd like to pay more in transactions fees whenever possible, said nobody ever.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 3, 2020 13:30:09

given enough time yes. There's no real world example of some technology not being replaced by something better. Trolls will bring up a rare case of VHS vs Beta Max ignoring the fact that we no longer use either today.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 3, 2020 13:26:20

So is there a point to battery anymore at higher levels for blue star?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 3, 2020 11:16:55

if 20-30k is pitifully low then what does that make $0 for BTC/LN rofl

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 3, 2020 10:23:50

It used to be like that, but it's now changed. It now speeds up time relative to all weapons, so yes while laser ramps up faster, battery also shoots faster, so you're just moving time ahead for both as the other comment says as well.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 3, 2020 10:22:54

create a google sheet and link us.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 3, 2020 07:57:38

I'm sure /u/bashco has a perfectly reasonable explanation. hahahaha Who am I kidding? /r/bitcoin mods are trigger happy. There's no rule being broken by that comment.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 20:53:43

> This was misrepresenting the truth and a lie through omission. . > Issued Assets can be migrated to another platform, or a new blockchain compatible with Liquid, **depending on the preferences of the issuer of the asset.** ie they have the ability to choose too

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 18:08:00

what apps or functions are you missing on a phone that isn't getting updates? Surely you're speaking from experience and not just parroting stuff you hear on reddit Not to mention the obvious. 5 year old iPads sure get new updates, but they also crawl when week 1 there were fast and snappy. No thank you

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 2, 2020 16:46:28
/r/btc/comments/gv7zqc/the_hypocrisy_is_unreal/fsoarah/ they removed it since /r/btc kept bringing it up **edit:** /u/xep426 found it. They removed this snippet ever since /r/btc kept bringing it up

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 16:44:50

on Liquid they can. But Blockstream super pinky promises to never use the master keys on Liquid. Do your research newbie. It's on their website for crying out loud.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 16:01:02

Also some new accounts are pushing Bitconnect 3.0, aka Crypto Hash UK with 200% daily profits.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 15:38:49

lol polish policing rules are funny by far. You're driving early morning and you get pulled over for no reason, they ask you to blow into a machine, warn you about not using seat belts, no drivers license check, no insurance check, no asking if you were drinking. Americans would flip their shit over this, but it's effective policing against drunks so I'm for it.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 14:46:41

You see to have a good grasp of the game. Care to share any other tips? - I have 3 basic buildings and 1 micro factory. It seems the microfactory is more space efficient by far and I have a feeling I should be getting more of these. No to mention the ability to house one type of material production in one factory to turn on/off

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 2, 2020 14:43:08

> I never said I am rich rofl backtracking already. You said you're retired which means you must have at least a few mil to do. Good luck sockpuppeting on your new accounts

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/UrbanGentry on June 2, 2020 14:41:32

Before the patch: If you had maxed all your planets would that give a cap above 8m or at 8m?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 2, 2020 14:31:00

I never offered to dox myself for some online bet with a sockpuppet account. If you're rich then just show proof, it's simple really. It's obvious you're not rich.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/UrbanGentry on June 2, 2020 14:30:12

> That would be normal for most, but here the prizes seem entirely linked to the type of chest. How long it takes you to earn that chest doesn't seem to affect what you get out of it, so a Rare chest found in a quick contract will have potentially the same rewards as a Rare chest found in the longer contract slots to the right. This seems to be whats slowing me down. P2W games usually don't work this way and I think this game needs to underline that better.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 2, 2020 14:28:50

> Quick contracts can be done in as little as 12secs with instant 0 gem finish. Quick are 12s / 2m / 5m / 10m max completion times. Mostly common drops. If you are actively playing you can get a lot of these done in a short space of time. Interesting. I assumed I'm always supposed to run the most far right quest I can for maximum rewards. Maybe that's what I was doing wrong.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 2, 2020 14:16:24

> save us the runaround. Poor people play games

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/UrbanGentry on June 2, 2020 14:14:07

or take a pic of the 3 lambos in your mom's driveway and save us the runaround.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/UrbanGentry on June 2, 2020 14:08:46

Like I said before millionaires have better things to do than shitpost on anonymous internet forums. You either have no money or no bigger goals in life or both. Everyone is rich on the internet since it's creation and with 3 lambos in their mom's driveway rofl

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/UrbanGentry on June 2, 2020 14:03:41

he called someone a fuck nut too?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/UrbanGentry on June 2, 2020 14:01:32

I'm sure the guy harassing users on a forum is retired lol. Best way to spend ones time after making millions.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/UrbanGentry on June 2, 2020 13:58:24

and your reward is a ban for user harassment. I'm sure "fuck nut" debunks at lot of objective points.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/UrbanGentry on June 2, 2020 13:57:54

What an effort you put in, seriously. 2 whole threads in 1 year. You made more shitposts and harassed more users in that time 100 fold.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/UrbanGentry on June 2, 2020 13:46:39

User harassment is against the Reddit site wide TOS let alone a subreddit. Blockstream puppets always turn a blind eye to their own actions. > You even commented on the post you **fuck nut:**

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/UrbanGentry on June 2, 2020 13:45:27

> If it is "paywalled so hard" how did I hit level cap in the second week playing, without being forced to pay money? Seriously there isn't a paywall. Whats the level cap that you hit? I'm level 8 There's a paywall for sure. We're literally talking about how the exotic items are disconnected from the main point of the game which is to produce all items. You basically gamble for 1-3 items per 4 hours and *hope* that you get the right color and type of item you require. Doesn't matter how fast or efficient or neatly setup your factories are. Doesn't matter if you're all caught up on research, you'll be waiting on items you can't produce and must instead hope to get from a quest. > Most of the building upgrades that needed components found in these crates, I had them already by the time I needed them. This one I'm going to call bullshit on. Seriously. Started the game a few days ago and been making sure to keep quests queued, already produce glass and eternium(?) and have upgraded 3 normal factories and 1 microfactory but I'm bottlenecked on those "special" parts. Research I'm all caught up on for my level. I even did the speed up for quests to make sure I get a whole bunch of these exotic items and guess what I'm still short on these items and bottlenecked.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 2, 2020 13:43:46

thanks for the response. It's good to hear you guys are taking feedback because I truly want to keep playing this game, I really do. I love Factorio and I love the spin Sandship has done on that game type as well as it's execution. I'll list what issues in this game bother me and what I believe is a middle ground proposal: - Battery draining issue: This game really, really, really eats through battery. There needs to be some setting to flip to reduce battery usage. I don't know if the issue is high CPU usage, high GPU usage or both, but it's borderline not practical to play this game daily as your phone will run out of juice. For reference I've played both Clash Royale and my current goto game Hades Star and I can play either all day and make it through the whole day. - UI issues with handling in transit materials: I know you can expand the side bar that show in transit materials and what's in stock, but it's a little annoying to use when you're producing 10 types of materials. Personally I think the top and bottom section should swap places, and there should be an easy way for me to dump excess materials when I'm full without having to go to the main screen and drag and drop. Maybe even a cap for each material that can be set? - UI issue 2: I've seen this posted by others and I agree. Allow factories to be turned of/on from the main view, without having to go inside each factory one by one. Additionally give an indicator of power on/off from that view, and possibly list the outputs being created for each factory. - game issue 1: I've seen this posted about the importer module bug. Basically if an importer doesn't have sufficient supply of a product, the entire factory halts. Frustrated me for a whole day and that's actually how I found this subreddit and found that someone provided an answer. - Paywall issues (several): 1) The "exotic" items that you collect from quests is too much gambling. It's practically disconnected from the game, as you have this wonderful factory that can produce all sorts of items and yet none of that matters because progress is bottleneck by essentially gambling on quests and hoping you get the right parts that don't come from this factory. Perhaps if we had the ability to trade or convert factory made items to these exotic items it would be fine. So long as we could lets say craft 50k steel plates for 1 red dongle and it takes 4 hours each and allows you to queue up crafting or batching then I'm sold. 2) The quests need to allow queuing or batching. I think the easiest comparison of quests in this game is Clash Royale's chests, and Hades Star artifacts. In Clash royale chests can be 3 hours, 8 hours or 1 day, but you can store 4 chests at once, which means even if a quest is done you can start another right away without being surprised at what materials you're missing for a quest. Some developers left SuperCell from Clash Royale and created Hades Star and they created another system, where you can queue up to 4 "artifacts" similar to how chests work, 3 hours each for a total of 12 hours without having to check into the game. The artifacts research one by one unlike Clash Royale and it means I don't need to baby this game every few hours just to make sure I'm progressing. Love that system and I've been playing that game for 2 years now with no distaste in my mouth. 3) Quest Speedups: It's cool that you can buy quest speedups and it seems a better deal than using gems for speeding up quests one by one, but the implementation falls short. If I purchase something with real dollars I shouldn't then have to jump through extra hoops or sit down and baby each quest to get all the value from the item I bought. It feels like I'm holding water in my hands and making sure I get the most of it before it slips through my fingers. The quests sped up all take 20 seconds to 20 minutes depending on quest. My recommendation is that rather than give a speed of 60x for 1 day, instead have the speedup be some kind of instant buffer, lets say 48 hours. If a quest takes 4 hours, then simply deduct from that 48 hour buffer and instantly open up the quests and allow the user to start another until you run out of buffer, rather than adding this wait time in between each quest. No time lost if someone isn't on adderall and waiting on each quest to finish just so then can start another.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Sandship on June 2, 2020 13:37:23

oh wow. So literally no one has seen a Hydra in game yet. I assumed some top players would already be there. In Clash Royale rich clans had players which had maxed cards the day of it's release, which would normally take years to max. I thought there might be at least 1 whale in this game doing that same.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 2, 2020 13:06:30

What's this bcash coin and which exchange lists it? I couldn't find it. I'm pretty sure you're just making up coin names at this point. You must be brainwashed by Blockstream with that term.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 13:03:35

and yet the majority don't see it that way and sued Apple for gutting core features that were available on day1. What's the point of software updates if some deliberately cripple core features? It's a gamble and 5 years of updates just mean 5 years of Apple dictating what you can and cannot do on your phone.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 2, 2020 13:02:35

That's a cool way of showing us that microtransactions can only occur on BCH not BTC.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 11:31:56

Blockstream openly projects their Liquid scam onto Bitcoin. Blockstream runs a privatized centralized solution where Blockstream has the master keys to the whole Liquid network and can steal your Bitcoin when they want. And they promote it over Lightning and Bitcoin when Bitcoin has high fees.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 11:14:14

and yet people waited 20 days for the mempool clear with many of those tx's getting evicted from the mempool after 2 weeks. You're like Tony Vays and his low fee bet that took 11 hours to get MANUAL confirmation from a pool. You're spinning tales from a unicorn.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 11:11:17

I guess you didn't hear that BCH handled 4x Bitcoin's record tx count in one day without issues. Misinformation is always pushed by you.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 10:56:43

I remember. Took over 6 months and threats to get them to refund my money after not shipping the ASIC.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 09:53:23

yup all true, nice collection. It's clear the first supporters to use Bcash were Bitcoin Core and Blockstream with Blockstream actively advocating and enforcing usage of the term.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 07:59:34

and time lost managing issues.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 2, 2020 07:57:50

so can we find out what the mempool is fill with and fee value per tx? then we can settle it

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 21:19:17

lol Eth as a failed project.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 21:18:39

?ake? Bitcoin Core wanted a clogged coin. It doesn't look like it's a failed experiment it IS a failed captured coin for corporate for the plundering. You already have a wart called Liquid growing on Bitcoin's side which aims to eat Bitcoin's transaction fees and takes away from Bitcoin's miner and therefore security. Early Bitcoiners warned of groups that would aim to take advantage of Bitcoin's problem and create private solutions rather than just actually fixing Bitcoin. Even users wanted bigger blocks and Blockstream knew as well as evidenced by Adam's own proposal of 2mb,4mb and 8mb. In the 2017 scaling war it was essentially a 2MB increase via SegWit or uncapped ala ABC's adjustable blocksize cap. Blockstream pushed for the former only to ease the pain but not solve it, so then Liquid would have a market for users wanted low fees.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 18:12:28

> I then Did some research and Realised BCH is a Fork of bitcoin that works as bitcoin was meant to work. So yh to me BCH is Bitcoin and BTC is some other crap no one in their right mind should ever use And this is why Blockstream coined the term used by trolls "Bcash". To fool users thinking BCH isn't working Bitcoin but some scam taking the name. Then users like yourself see the fees, confirmation times and ask why is coin #1 working worse than any top 200 shitcoin and the gears start turning. Tide is slowly turning. Already there's news of cryptocurrency ATM's dropping support for Bitcoin and using Ethereum and Bitcoin Cash.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 18:04:31

If you zoom into the graph 30 days before the halving Bitcoin was clearing the memory pool. No transactions were left over. This has been true for the last year and longer. Since the halving it's more likely the tx fee floor did not spontaneously lower, but rather with the low block rewards have created an even more competitive environment where miners aren't risking sweeping low values tx's and risk having their block orphaned. Can you show me that hundreds of tx's right now or this week were below 1sat/byte?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 17:44:58
/r/btc/comments/guo3jh/so_what_happened_with_bitcoin_hashrate_death/fskcqos/ > Go ahead prove me right, change the subject. Looks like you changed the subject and owned yourself rofl

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 16:56:40

It's true. Bitcoin broke it's p2p cash function has no solutions ready for production use and claims to be a settlement layer instead.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 16:55:59

I know it's not Bitcoin, just like BTC tokens on Liquid aren't Bitcoin. It's a question that troll /u/ssvb1 can't answer otherwise he loses both ways: - If he says wrapped Bitcoin on Ethereum is Bitcoin than the obvious next question is why does /r/bitcoin censor any discussion of it - If he says wrapped Bitcoin on Ethereum is not Bitcoin, than neither is Bitcoin on Blockstream's Liquid network and begs the question of why do /r/bitcoin moderators allow it. As is typical with Blockstream trolls around here, they stop responding for the day when caught with a losing argument and I assume rotate to another account for the day. I noticed this pattern with a few accounts that would go cold when confronted with a losing situation and so far I've reported a few accounts and got them banned. I got /u/notgonnagetbanned banned recently and proved he was responding with different accounts in the same thread with similar setups and I suspect a few trolls of doing the same here. /u/notgonnagetbanned's new account is /u/shortupdate as he's harassing me via DM and ironically his first comment of that account is a comment under a thread created by his old account. He's not very intelligent:

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 15:53:15

I'd even give BTC a pass if it cleared the mempool and left < 100 or < 50 tx's. However when a small BTC block only has a capacity of 1k to 3k tx's, 100 tx's is 3%-9% of the blocksize. On a normal day without the fluctuating hashrate BTC would even clean up the crumbs so to speak, but when economics are at play due to the new coinbase reward being halved we see BTC struggles to clear it's plate and only returns when the fees become big enough.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 15:47:36

I don't accuse you of speaking the truth. I know your attempt to paint my comment as agreeing with OP failed, but give it another try troll. It's the only argument you had and you're desperate to get anything on me xD

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 15:42:24
/r/btc/comments/guo3jh/so_what_happened_with_bitcoin_hashrate_death/fsk2fxx/,2d On what day and what hour did a block empty the mempool? When you zoom in after a block took a chunk out you can clearly see a few hundred tx's always left over with anywhere between 100 and 700+ tx's waiting at 1sat/byte

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 15:33:17

you're accusing me of agreeing with the theory which is plain false just because I happened to comment in that thread. it's lol worthy how desperate you are to paint people Typical from a Blockstream troll

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 15:31:05

> Your boy cryptostrategies did and you commented on the video which proves you were aware of it. I was? I don't watch videos at work, just stroll through the comments. Where did I confirm a death spiral? I know you're desperate now

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 15:28:22

so where did I say there was a death spiral? my comment sure doesn't say it My comment literally calls out CCMRT as a troll. Can't you read?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 15:25:27

You have to go out of your way to find traders on the hades official discord channel and use diplomacy station to get arts. It's doable but a bit of a hassle.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 1, 2020 15:23:00

> BCH has a higher tx count than BTC did at 3 years old.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 15:20:11

Who said there was one, but you? Don't lose focus now.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 15:18:26

based on this GUI I'm supposed to tell that I can't buy BCH on Binance? Can anyone confirm this?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 15:03:39

> 1 sat/byte transactions are clearing so how is the mempool not cleared: after 20 days xD. Everything I said is a verifiable fact. Don't get upset

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 15:02:47

Why not? because BCH is growing faster than BTC? BCH has a higher tx count than BTC did at 3 years old. I already had this conversation with troll FieserKiller and he dropped the conversation so quick after agreeing And just for comparison LTC existed for 7 years and has less tx count than BCH.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 15:02:09

basically. tx count dropped hard since the halving and still it's been 20 days since the mempool has been cleared.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 13:35:08

are you sure? I remember trading my BSV coins for BCH soon after the fork, I think it was on Binance before they delisted BSV. I know Binance made a USA version of binance and maybe that's what you saw?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 13:34:02

Has the Bitcoin mempool cleared yet since 20 days ago? Nope. It's struggling the the hashrate loss and tx count has actually dropped, while only losing 15%-20% hashrate loss. You should also ask /u/notgonnagetbanned how his claims of a BCH death spiral went lol. He was spamming it in /r/bitcoinmarkets every single day in the altcoin thread with graphs and charts lol. Now he's banned because I caught him using multiple accounts to comment on his own posts and now he's back with a new account to DM me called /u/shortupdate.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 13:32:58

yeah they stopped trading for a few days after the hashwar but that was years ago. I assumed the thread was about something from this week/month.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 13:22:26

oh wow a paid troll > Blockstream supporters: "Epstein didn't donate to the Digital Currency Initiative."

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 13:07:12

it was stopped before? Why? The May scheduled hardfork?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 12:50:48

he's trying to flip the question. He knows full well no one is advocating against any discussion in /r/btc. It's /r/bitcoin who laid out draconian rules were it's breaking it's own rules that it laid out. The unwritten rule is that Blockstream products can be discussed anytime in /r/bitcoin regardless if they're just discussing tokens on Liquid unrelated to bitcoin like this fantasy game.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 11:40:30

Basically. I got Blockstream paid troll /u/ssvb1 already doing damage control already. - Game tokens hosted on Liquid unrelated to Bitcoin is OK discussion in /r/bitcoin. - Bitcoin tokenized on Ethereum is a no-no however despite it being closer related to Bitcoin, than some game tokens hosted on Liquid.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 11:24:12

Blockstream attempts to buy out or bribe just anyone they can.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 11:01:01

Of course not. You might be a newbie in the scene, but there's a phrase: "Not your keys, not your coins". You probably never heard of Mt Gox. Just like the Robin Hood app they don't even trade Bitcoin's just have some internal ledger. Not your keys, not your coins.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 10:42:57

/u/nullc they're advertising Liquid again. Well actually a token on Liquid which has nothing to do with Bitcoin > I think I've only seen liquid mentioned once on /r/bitcoin - /nullc Here's the nth time it's been advetised on /r/bitcoin

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 10:36:30

So assuming max battery(dps 390) and max laser (dps 300-1000) 1) How long does it take for laser to reach 390 dps? 2) How many seconds until damage dealt compared to battery is the same?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on June 1, 2020 10:14:48

He has no problem pushing products from Blockstream since they pay his salary. Liquid is NOT Bitcoin and tokens created by Blockstream's CSO on Liquid are also NOT Bitcoin. Yet /u/bashco lets it slide because he can't bite the hand that feeds him.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 10:12:52

Apple just settled a lawsuit because they crippled facetime via software updates because it was cheaper than paying for a patent on older phones.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on June 1, 2020 10:11:30

haha /u/bashco allow shilling of Blockstream products. Liquid != Bitcoin and he knows that yet he flipped the tables when Reddit announced a token on Ethereum rofl. Rules for me, not for thee.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on June 1, 2020 09:36:01

how does he erase all chat? Just spam it out of view?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 31, 2020 10:04:42

Remember when Tony vays showed the world during a debate a tx taking 11 hours with manual pool confirmation lol. He was so sure low fees would be confirmed quickly. Made BTC look amazing /s

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 30, 2020 17:21:21

this one is a timeless classic. Samson Mow used all the tricks and DCMA attempts to take it down.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 30, 2020 11:58:01

you won't find this article posted in /r/CryptoCurrency

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 29, 2020 12:49:46

> BTC had FUD back in the day as well. yeah it sure did. But as we see now tech doesn't matter brand name does and Bitcoin didn't have official exchanges rebranding it several times and using slander terms. it's crickets when facts are laid out. Usually this guy pursues conversation to the bitter end and he dropped it like it's hot

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 22:47:01

so bch reached Bitcoin's tx count faster, even better. It's not even August yet. And that's with the Bcash campaign meant to dissuade users from using BCH and several name changes by exchanges and a split. Looks like the FUD against hardforks was proven wrong.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 21:12:30

sure you can. Especially since Bitcoin gave up the p2p cash function while Bitcoin Cash functions as Bitcoin did. If Bitcoin pivoted to a subway sandwhich next it's not p2p cash is it. Satoshi whitepaper clearly state Bitcoin is p2p cash not a settlement layer.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 19:41:10

nice find. I'll be trying this

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/DataHoarder on May 28, 2020 19:39:19

it sure it. Just like Fortnite is and they have anti griefing rules for tourneys

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 19:38:28

clear up merger fs and snapraid for me. I heard merger fs has the ability to fuse many drives of several different sizes and snapraid does parity plus snapshots. Is mergerfs not needed to pool all drives as one big volume?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/DataHoarder on May 28, 2020 18:13:23

and so will I, that's the meta. But meta isn't to go after unsanced ship if there's only one.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 18:01:51

Exactly. What am I missing out on without updates? Which app cannot I not run? What examples are you drawing experience from? And then there's ios where a single update removed Facetime for older phones, not because the hardware can't support be but because Appled decided settling a class action lawsuit was cheaper. Updates are a gamble, you never know which features will be lost or deprecated. The only guaranteed way to retain feature is not updating.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 18:01:18

rofl trolls twisting words. Real Bitcoin is one that hasn't pivoted to settlement layer and still aims to be p2p cash

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 17:59:13

drone leapers is different than singling out the only unsanced ships and just suiciding your ship at him. You literally have 2 sets of rules being played depending on a single mod.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 17:58:00

are you unable to use websites? It did not,2w

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 17:57:06

> Well yeah, but you enter blue stars fully prepared to lose your ship to other players, as they're hostile to you. and right there your argument falls apart. Sanced ships have 0 skin in a BLS game and can suicide against a non sanced ship and only 1 player has consequences

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 17:57:03

> If you think Android updates are worthless and provide no value or worthwhile features, go buy a phone running Ice Cream Sandwich and back it all up. My samsung s4 runs every app no problem and it's ice cream. nice strawman > Listen to yourself - you're arguing that annual OS updates are meaningless and don't provide anything and anyone who values those updates is an imbecile who doesn't know what they're talking about. I'm not sure if you're a troll or just love arguing for the sake of arguing on the internet, but I got better things to do. Buy whatever phone you want, apparently I'll be annoying the piss out of you by having different preferences. I'm ok with that. No i'm not arguing that at all. Nice attempt at twisting words. Updates are good, but not required to get full value out of your phone.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 17:54:54

and in 3 years we have the same tx count as Bitcoin had at age 3. Sounds right

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 17:53:32

> Blue stars are meant to be played in any way you see fit And therefore Red Star is meant to be played in any way you see fit as well. You're playing by the rules within the game, you're not hacking and simply playing towards your own goals.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 16:19:09

> There are no consequences because it isn’t griefing. Are you high? Of course there are consequences to an unsanced ship dying. Lost credits. Meanwhile the sanced player has no consequences. That's probably what you meant to say. and yes I know about the drone leap meta and the window to attack them. That's not my case as I don't run drone leap.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 16:18:04

> Take a look at the Corp your opponents are in, sometimes two members of the same Corp will try to matchmake together to ensure one gets the win. No. I check all players to see their levels and that's not the case. In 2+ years of hades star I've seen maybe 5 total cases with 2 players from 1 team, and 2 cases where someone from my own clan was in same match. > You could also run Blast Shield, rockets are really a worry then. bigger ships have more module slots and higher upgrades. they'll just laser lvl10 you, or teleport bond, or emp. They don't play the game and equip to be unkillable. What are you going to do against maxed modules?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 16:16:25

nope no drone leap at all. timewarp omega bond, etc. Yeah I understand the meta and need for pressuring and killing a drone leap player early but this ain't the case. It's actually pretty common for higher level ships to bully smaller ships just because they can. Especially when they're rocking lvl10+ everything and a single rocket can cripple your changes of winning and 2 rockets outright remove you from the game without you being to do anything about. Same ships ran with barrier to "catch" you and even played teleport games with me when I ran that mod. It's blatant.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 16:14:39
/r/HadesStar/comments/gsclnz/have_you_ever_been_griefed_in_blue_star/fs4j1sx/ > A griefer or bad faith player is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and harasses other players within the game (trolling), using aspects of the game in unintended ways.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 16:12:34

but just to confirm griefing is possible in Blue Stars? Earlier today I was told [griefing isn't possible in Blue Star because... it's PvP]( > [There's no such thing as griefing in Blue Stars. It is a PvP mode.](

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 16:07:36

> What if the crowd never comes? What if miners simply give up? Then BCH fails. Why should any cryptocurrency exist if it cant find a sustainable model. Satoshi even stated this yourself. And your back to parroting dumb scaling arguments that just don't pan out. You've been brainwashed by Blockstream to believe every user must run a node and despite proving that commercial off the shelf computers can support gigabyte blocks you're back at it. Look up Jtoomim's research into blocksize increases. You may have heard of him, he's only one of the major developers for a mining pool.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 15:58:01

I love the trolls that cherry pick the occasional drop in tx count. Every few months trolls bring up, Litecoin has regained tx count over BCH... dismissing that LTC has existed for 7 years and BCH for 3 rofl. Are you really this stupid, or just looking to FUD?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 15:55:24

Liquid has no reason to exist if Bitcoin works without clogging.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 15:51:01

Even better Bitcoin mempool is now evicting transactions that have been waiting for 2 weeks. Bitcoin mempool hasn't cleared in over 20 days now.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 15:50:35

Been using Android since Cupcake. I've had more apps break and lose support with new Android versions more than I could count. In 10 years I've yet to have anything break when not updating. Lol who cares for a "modern" design, when they just change some notification bar behaviors move stuff around, when core app that you rely on break.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 15:46:24

> Like Roger Ver who used to run a public service where he paid people for that ( he paid for information, not for upvotes rofl. Way to not understand the impact. The guy making claims bought accounts to upvote his thread to the top, very normal, not shady at all. We should trust the guy. all good guys buy upvotes /s

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 15:43:52

Don't hate the player, hate the ~~game~~ devs. Before Croids existed the daily "kill 200 sentinel" challenges created the similar incentives, but instead players dropped down to lower levels. Now Croids incentivize players to punch up as high as they can. Why would I go for a 100k roid when I can go for a 225k roid. Plus most smarter players already maxed their RS scanner for maximum white star rewards. granted I don't see many players in public RS9 as is.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 15:43:20

> Literally any and all features of Android 10 (including screen recording, system level dark themes, enhanced privacy controls, etc) as well as any NEW features that will be added to Android 11 and subsequent versions. You were unable to find apps on older Android to screen record. Give me a break. People were recording screen before this feature was released you're just clueless. lol @ system level dark themes impacting your daily life and "enhanced privacy" with Google products. Give me specific examples of being limited by lack of updates. What enhanced privacy feature were you specific looking for instead of just throwing vague terms around. > If you're not a Samsung shill and are actually interested in knowing what features have been introduced with each Android version, I suggest looking them up. Lol I don't own a Samsung and haven't owned one since they stuck spyware "CarrierIQ" on the Note 3. Guess there goes your only argument. I think the problem with users today is that the immediately look to paint every as pro Apple, anti Apple, pro Samsung, anti Samsung, etc without actually taking a look at what each offers.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 15:40:35

> Liquid is a way of transacting Bitcoin. No different than allowing conversation about coinbase. So is wrapped tokens on Ethereum but that's not allowed discussion. Also your own source, top comment says: > Probably cause OP was literally buying upvotes. But hey, bcashers are the conspiracy theorists I wonder why you cherry pick and promote manipulators who buy upvotes lol

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 15:31:30

hahaha "once" Literally this week another one /r/Bitcoin has a strict policy on no altcoins or non Bitcoin. /r/btc allows any discussions. Is Liquid Bitcoin now?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 15:02:55

> I’ve had apps just stop working after a while because that phone wasn’t receiving support anymore very quickly. Like which specifically? I know for a fact I've lost more apps due to newer Android versions not supporting older smaller indie app devs and I've yet to lose any apps when not updating. > Also frustrating was sometimes new apps coming to the Play Store wouldn’t work on my phone, because my phone wasn’t on the correct OS version for the new app. Lots of version mismatching. Would have to wait sometimes months for the app to get updated, if it ever did. Again it seems you're talking from experience, so what's the name of the app? > Haven’t had any problems with my iPhone, except for apps that utilize the newer iPhone’s functionality that my current 7+ doesn’t have, like FaceID. 5 year old iPads on the latest support iOS crawl. I guess some people are willing to trade functionality and usability for "software version number go up". To each their own. Everyone shits on lack of updates, but they shy away from stating the obvious effects of being forced to update to the newest OS update which makes your Safari crawl, multitasking break etc. I mean Apple literally just settle a class action lawsuit last month for disabling Facetime for older iPhones because of saving money.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 14:30:42

> I don't give a fuck about your experience and I'm not going to provide any of my experiences to prove an already established fact. Ie you have no examples and have never been affected by lack of updates. > Literally all you're doing is defending multi billion-dollar companies. And you've shown your colours as an anti-Apple hater and defender of all that is Android, even when Android device makers do really stupid shit like providing 1 or 2 years of major OS updates. I still can't find out how I'm affected by lack of updates. And I still can't get you to give me an example of what features you're missing. All I can tell is that your argument is basically "I want software version number go up now!" Tell me again why features you're missing or apps that you can no longer run that you're bitching about? I just gave you an example of Apple updates making products worse, but you're not able to tell me how lack of updates make products worse. Not. One. Example. That's why I'm asking. and who the fuck is felicia?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 14:26:58

> If you can't see how that video depicts griefing, I'm afraid I'm just not going to be able to explain it to you in a way you would find satisfactory. For all we know green is high in influence and looking to clear the map as fast as possible, which included using destiny on a destroyer that would have taken out his ship had he remained for the death explosion. He was clearly in the red. Why is it green's problem that yellow sent unsupported ships to a planet knowing the destroyer was on his way? I'm saying the example you provided is not a great example of griefing and at best green's action fall in a grey area. I've literally done the same thing green player did but with alpha rocket and then cost someone their ships as a result. At the time I thought destroyers followed the same ruleset as interceptors. Not to mention should developers want to stop such scenarios they absolutely can apply similar ruleset used with interceptors and call it a day. > I really hope you're just playing devil's advocate here and are, in reality, actually able to identify where the line is so you can take care not to cross it yourself. See this is what you don't seem to get, there's plenty of newbies who don't fully understand the mechanics of this game and can make plays that seem like griefing despite them not being so. Let me give some examples of what some players might call griefing and others chalk up to newbie mistakes. - Player 1 is running barrage and just jumped on 2 phoenix, player 2 enter same sectors and wipes all the little ships forcing Player 1 to either give up on that sector or most likely get killed due to barrage damage being insufficient. - Player 1 is chasing a bomber with Player 2's support, Player 2 emp's too early and catches some of Player 1's ships as well as the bomber and neighboring sector bombers finish Player 1's ships. tell me you've never seen a bad EMP. where do you draw the line? - Player 1 cleared a planet with a neighboring bomber nearby. Player 1 parked his ship to intercept rockets so that he could take arts without needing to actually kill that bomber. Player 2 being a newbie sends his battleship on top of the same sector as Player 1's battleship. now the bomber is firing 2 rockets to the same roid and the combined dps of both ships cannot take both rockets out in time and are slowly chipped until they die and then ts get fired upon. Again I'm speaking from actual scenarios here - A destroyer is coming for Planet A. Player 1 sends a battleship to destroy it. Player 2 thinking he can queue his transports to arrive just after the destroyer is destroyed does so. Player 1 thinking he has the destroyer soon destroyed queues to another roid. Instead the destroyer survives with red health and the timing works out where the planet explosion kills Player 2's TS. Again this is all Player 2's fault for playing risking/greedy. The list goes on and on of actions that can be interpreted both ways. Stop faulting other players for making greedy and risky moves and then reaping the rewards. Destroying ships is part of the game, in fact the game incentivizes players to destroy as many ships as they can as fast as possible to fill said bar.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 14:22:54

Who am I defending? I'm speaking from experience while you're riding some hype with no actual experience in the matter. What functions are you missing out on due to lack of updates? Any examples to reference? You just see a crowd protesting and just join in without knowing what you're signing up for. Meanwhile take a look at the other side of the fence. Apple is still giving updates to 5 year old iPads and guess what? The iPad lags and crawls as as result of not being able to support more resource intensive OS. Safari stttttuters and apps take seconds to switch like a shitty Android from 2010. Yet on day 1 the same iPad never so much as hiccuped or lost frames when rendering the same websites on Safari. That's planned obsolescene if I've ever seen any. Hell Apple even had a class action lawsuit because one of their updates disabled facetime for iPhone 5's LOL See this is how you use actual experience and not unfounded arguments. What functionality are you missing out on due to lack of updates on Android?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 13:58:44

> Simply because my phone is able to currently run apps on outdated software doesn't mean I wish I could take advantage of the features of Android 10 and beyond? And what features are you missing out on then? I'm sure you're speaking from actual experience. If anything newer updates have a history of stripping features, like iPhones disabling facetime for the iPhone 5, Android breaking app functionality not always for security reasons etc. And of course newer features being more resource intensive making the product ironically unusable and obsolete? Sure Apple gives long term updates... but have you ever used a 5 year old iPad with the latest software updates? It literally crawls and lags like an Android from 2010, where on the original software it was snappy and responsive. You have no idea what you're talking about, you're just riding the hype wave with no experience to back up your claims. I mean I'm all ears how lack of software updates have made your life worse.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 13:54:31

Can promox do mergerFS or some flexible Raid6 out of the box?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/DataHoarder on May 28, 2020 13:51:19

How is that griefing? - He's destroying a game objective and one could argue yellow was greedy to take a planet so late with a destroyer already on it's way. For all we know green's objective is to fill the bar because he's high on influence and he's speed running the map as fast as possible. - One could argue green player used destiny to avoid taking damage on his bs, as he was already in the red, where there was a risk of losing the ship otherwise. - Inexperienced players miscalculate and often have no sense of game timers and just panic when they see a destroyer headed to a planet. From my experience I see it several times a week easy and often times these players take out their own ships as well or mine. It happens. It's a very common occurrence which is why I bring it up. Early on in rs6 I sometimes destroyed my own ships or others by accident as I was learning the game as well and for sure I was not griefing. - Devil's advocate. Had yellow plotted a path to planet and green sent a BS to the same planet with the destroyer arriving and the timing worked out were yellow lost ships as a result and could not pull out in time, would that be griefing too since green should have moved ship? End result was other player ships lost. Griefing should be a term reserved for actual game events were players can screw each other that cannot be patched by devs. Dev's already patched it such that interceptors triggered by another player cannot attack the 2nd players transports. Literally the same rule could apply to destroyer explosions. If yellow player never attacked that destroyer with battleships nor did he have battleships in that sector at the time, then have the destroyer be unable to apply damage to yellow's ts. Easy fix for dev and 0 possibility of newbie players making mistakes. > There's no such thing as griefing in Blue Stars. It is a PvP mode. Sure there is. PvP vs PvE has nothing to do with the ability to grief. Hell Fortnite of the most popular games in the last few years has explicit anti griefing rules for their tournaments. In fact based on whether you're sanced or unsanced you can see 2 types of players in Blue stars. let me expand. - "anti-griefers". Usually these are sanced ships who let unsanced ships win. There's literally threads where sanced ship players say they give unsanced ships the win: > Also, whenever I play a sanc bls, I always play for second place if there is a non-sanc player in the game. I’ll go out of my way to assassinate a sanc player to increase my rank and give the poor guy looking for credits an easier day. - And then there's of course griefers in BLS usually a ship that's 1 level above yours packed with 2 rockets, etc who literally B lines across the star center to chase you until he gets you. It happens more often than you think. One time I was lucky enough to run into the guy twice in a row and both times he decided I was the target and both times I lost my ship before even the AI ship suicided. And after he killed me he just let the red collapsing zone take this full health ship. Tell me that's not griefing lol. sanced ships know they can bully unsacned ships because they have 0 skin in the game and nothing to lose.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 13:50:23

what apps are you unable to run on old phones or how have you been affected due to lack of software updates ? I can never get any examples.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 13:18:02

what apps are you unable to run on old phones or how have you been affected due to lack of software updates ? I can never get any examples.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 13:17:46

what apps are you unable to run on old phones or how have you been affected due to lack of software updates ? I can never get any examples.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 13:17:38

what apps are you unable to run on old phones or how have you been affected due to lack of software updates ? I can never get any examples.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 13:17:33

what apps are you unable to run on old phones or how have you been affected due to lack of software updates ? I can never get any examples.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 13:17:26

what apps are you unable to run on old phones or how have you been affected due to lack of software updates ? I can never get any examples.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 13:17:17

what apps are you unable to run on old phones or how have you been affected due to lack of software updates ? I can never get any examples.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 28, 2020 13:17:01

my main board is nearly 10+ years old. i5-2500k cpu, etc. I dabble in a lot of OS'es for different reasons and this is the first time I had any distro trip over itself at basic disk identification. All the hardware in that PC is nearly a decade old including the disks mentions other than the SSD's which are common Samsung SSD's This weekend I'll try installing regular debian, see if it can resolve the disk detection issue and install OMV on top the OS and see how things go.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/DataHoarder on May 28, 2020 12:50:16

how does someone destroy someones ships in red stars today? They cannot. So how does a mod differentiate between a bad player timing EMP at the wrong times versus a griefer? Seems like a relic from an older time.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 12:48:22

might as well right.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/DataHoarder on May 28, 2020 10:59:29

If you dig into my post history you'll see I was going for a mergerfs+snapraid nas setup and OMV seemed like the easiest path, as it gave these modules a GUI. Next best thing is install said packages on ubuntu and editing configs and creating scripts... not as fun

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/DataHoarder on May 28, 2020 10:56:54

> but i had to reinstall it twice ebecause first installation had samba broken lolwtf > i installed it from usb flash drive without any issues and it detected all 6 hdds You can google and find the problem I described is a common topic with OMV. Most blamed flashing the iso with Unetbootin since it does things a little different, but RUFUS also had the same issue. All my 8+ HDDs/ssds are detected by ubuntu/windows just fine, must be some debian related issue. Most of these disks are older than 5 years or so, so that's even more shocking

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/DataHoarder on May 28, 2020 10:55:10

I've created bootable mediums since the 90's. Had some occasional issues with some USB disks not being recognized by BIOS but never something as horrible as this. Just to summarize: 1) If you burn the ISO to usb, OMV will recognize all hdd's and sdd's but fail to partition any 2) If you burn a cd/dvd, OMW will only recognize and partition some hdd's no ssd's. My gut feeling is it has something to do with the debian base which might a little dated with drivers. Never had a bad bootable experience like OMV. didn't think it could be like that.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/DataHoarder on May 28, 2020 10:27:49

I know for one I can't do RS9 yet, but I specifically do RS9's just for the croid, much to the annoyance of RS9 players actually wanting to clear the planets. Just playing the game.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 10:04:51

> Griefing in public red stars is a bannable offense. And how can you differentiate griefing from just bad plays? Where do you draw the line? 1) For example you can't EMP all willy nilly anymore, because it requires at least 1 enemy ship in the sector. However you can emp allies with enemies at very inconvenient times 2) In blue stars sanced ships have nothing on the line so they don't need to play the core game, they can grief non-sanced ships who have credits on the line by just going after them and suiciding even if it means both ships will die. How do you ban for this? 3) Barrage players get pissed when noobies enter the same sector and clear the tiny ships. Often times the barrage player gets crushed as a result. how do you ban for this?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 10:01:32

this is why /r/bitcoin markets Blockstream products like Liquid.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 09:31:54

ah yes the 3 month old account with 3 comments pushing the new narrative that Roger is leaving BCH. /u/rattie_ok and /u/loopnester are in your same campaign, contact them.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 08:54:13

and they got the shaming tactic down... "It's not to late to apologize, etc". Eric Lombozo is of course harrasing him like he did during the UASF campaign.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 08:04:21

so many fake accounts harassing him. Core needed to remove any big block supporters.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 08:03:15

> you shouldn't need more than 1 barrage. 2 feels excessive Assuming certain mod levels I assume. What build can you start rs9 with? > always try to bait the phoenix into a favourable position before teleporting in It seems I've got the majority of the rules for rs8, but I was not paying attention to this one. > you shouldn't need more than 1 barrage. 2 feels excessive And what weapon would I sub for the 2nd barrage? 1barrage+1massbattery+? Also probably requires a certain barrier level right to buy time for half the dps? Right now I have barrier lvl5 and sometimes I need to pop the 2nd.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 28, 2020 08:00:45

crypto is one manipulated landscape.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 28, 2020 07:57:36

I don't care if Bitcoin is clogged, which group might? Whales? Miners?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 27, 2020 23:02:57

and can you name what group or groups might benefit from this? And who can afford to?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 27, 2020 22:23:40

I can't name a single app that doesnt work for the s4. whatsapp, facebook etc all work just fine lets start with what apps stopped working for you on your old phone.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 27, 2020 20:13:05

I have an old Samsung S4 sitting in my desk which is near a decade old and it can run every single app my that phone from 2019 can.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 27, 2020 17:14:07

> From the statistics, it seems like the market is slightly overvaluing Bitcoin, while it is SEVERELY undervaluing Bitcoin Cash according to the cost of production. Welcome to cryptoland where an artificially throttled coin which functions objectively worse has done nothing in 10 years is still #1. > Normally, there would be an equilibrium, or there wouldn't be such high margin differences, but to me, it doesn't make sense that the Bitcoin hashrate is falling when it isn't that unprofitable to mine Bitcoin, but the Bitcoin Cash hashrate is stagnant, despite it being extremely unprofitable to mine. 1st separate your biases of the 2 coins. Hashrate follows price and it's split more or less accordingly. Second like I said in the comment above, you made 3 assumptions and are wondering why your conclusion doesn't make sense? then one of your assumptions is wrong. Take electricity cost for example. I think your bias assumes every major Bitcoin mining farm is near a hydro dam or in china and are getting $0.12 or less, but the halvening may have just proven that the 30% of miners were mining with much higher expenses and there aren't enough miners in the cheap locations to make up the difference in miners. **Going back to my comment calculate break even electricity cost at today's Bitcoin's prices assuming most recent generation of ASIC miners and you'll have a better idea of what's the ceiling**

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 27, 2020 16:04:02

and what features are you missing out on by missing updates? What apps can you not run? I can never get an answer for this.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Android on May 27, 2020 15:52:49

Suspicious in what sense? Miners aren't going to quit and leave money on the table if mining Bitcoin is still profitable, and there's no way to force mass miners from stopping mining, then the obvious answer is that miners simply left because it's not profitable. Therefore one of your assumptions is wrong. - Electricity price might have been higher - Average ASIC efficiency might be worse. - Some miners are selling Bitcoin are set prices per a set contract and not market rate.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 27, 2020 15:40:04

yeah /r/bitcoin's moderator /u/bashco flipped the table like a 5 year old and started insulting the Reddit admins in public. But when Blockstream's Samson Mow was creating tokens on Ethereum he didn't bat an eye or denounce him.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 27, 2020 15:32:26

> Good analysis. I haven't done a deep dive on the consolidation transactions. To me it does look like somebody keeping the BTC mempool full. That's not difficult to do, but it's costly! Again no one's actively keeping the pool full. This 1 month old account spam poster /u/kealenz is spinning a passive activity of the effects of the halving (less hashrate, slower blocks) as an active move by some party that benefits from it. There's near 0 proof supporting his claims. > Given the changes in mining, price shifts, high fees, and movement of 2009 UTXOs and the signed messages lampooning CSW, I'd say it's safe to say something is going on in the BTC space. And now he's got you spun up and concocting your own theories to unrelated events. The 2009 UTXO's moving was related to making CSW look bad and completely unrelated to Bitcoin clogging up as it always does. Like I said before Bitcoin clogs regularly, but the halving was a big hit in the nuts to the miners so Bitcoin is extra backed up now. And as with any event in crypto spammers and manipulators will spin this as "something is going on". Nothing is going on except for miners leaving due to unprofitability due to the halving. > Let's see how prices move over the next month, I think this will give us more clues. That being said and based on my own indicators that I've been using since 2013, I expect a bull run mid to end of this year, at worst early next year. One indicator is such articles as this one attempting to panic people into buying Bitcoin, because that's essentially what OP is attempting.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 27, 2020 15:26:47

> What's strange is the very high fee UTXO consolidations. Almost like somebody is in a hurry to move a lot of volume. This has yet to be proven. /u/kealenz is a 1 month old account spamming reddit across many subs with his theory but I don't see any data link or number crunching to support his theories. This whole thread reeks of manipulation but to what purpose I don't know. Perhaps typical "signs" of bull mania and hyping people that whales are "getting ready" to buy/sell etc under the guise of a technical discussion thanks to the halving creating another tx backlog. As far as facts that we can confirm: - Tx count has been decreasing not increasing. - Mempool has been backlogged so yes users are starting bidding wars to get confirmed same day. However this event occurs regularly on Bitcoin and the only reason it's of note now is because Bitcoin lost anywhere from %17-30% hashrate due to the effects of the halving. Otherwise this whole thread would not even be newsworthy. Even now it's barely sitting at 7 points which confirms other users also see it as a fluff or manipulation thread. And there's obvious logic too: - Why would exchanges consolidate at this time, unless they're in dire need to consolidate and expect things to only get worse. Businesses look to avoid burning money. /u/kealenz is pushing manipulation news imo

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 27, 2020 15:09:50

But wait it gets worse. Head mods of /r/cryptocurrency are now promoting companies who are buying votes and comments and when proven the mods leave the thread alone. /u/jwinterm sticky: In that thread alone several mods are asking easy softball questions, no hard questions, where as in the past most of these mods have shat on companies services that they aren't invested in. Proof of fake accounts paid to shill and comment: > I would recommend not stickying those future ama's. Straight up banning them for this manipulation would probably be perceived as censorship, but I would at least make an example out of them: "if you manipulate with bots, you shouldn't expect any support from the mods." Yet the thread is still up and Jwinterm plans to plans to promote more shady company since he's getting paid.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 27, 2020 14:24:13

basic formulas really.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 27, 2020 14:10:51

Been doing RS8's for a week now. Here's what I learned: 1) Forget soloing 4 planets like the RS6 days. Settle for 1, maybe 2 at best. RS8's heavily depend on extra players working together. 2) Barrier 1 won't cut it, you need at least level 5 to buy time for barrage to kill 2 capital ships. 3) Mass barrage is nice for cutting down bomber rockets when your barriers are on cooldown. Make sure it's high enough to be able to kill the rockets in time with short distances. 4) You must kill bomber/phoenix 1st in sector. Collosi+tiny ships 2nd. Otherwise chasing bombers can put you in bad positions and phoenix's don't fuck around with dual lasers. 5) 1st planet you teleport+emp, then teleport ships 2+3 and 1 pops barrier instantly. That works great. 2nd planet you can attempt to enter from a side so you hit capital ships 1st or wait for tp to cooldown and run the same strat. For 15 minutes you can do both planets this way. I'm just looking for confirmation from the veteran players on these strats and if I'm missing something more nuanced or some detail that makes RS8 easier/effective to run.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 27, 2020 13:04:39

You always ask who benefits and Blockstream benefits from high fees which is why they advertise their altcoin in /r/bitcoin

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 27, 2020 12:53:31

Forget theories lets start with facts because this theory of OP is full of misinformation. 1) Bitcoin tx count after halving per day has been falling not increasing. Bitcoin Halving was around the 11th and coincidentally that's where the local peak in tx count is. After that it's falling. The congestion in Bitcoin is not due to a rise in average tx's per day, but instead Bitcoin losing hashrate and blocks churning out at 5 blocks per hour for the last 2 weeks, rather than 6. That's 17% slower throughput right there. Most of us predicated that Bitcoin would clog as a result of loss of hashrate as it's a basic formula based on coin price, coinbase reward cut in half etc. Bitcoin mempool hasn't cleared in over 20 days, although it's getting hard to track older tx's since they get evicted from the mempool after 14 days. 2) So therefore it's not a sudden spike in tx count that's choking Bitcoin, it's simply Bitcoin's throughput being affected by the halving since it lost many miners and now can't keep up.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 27, 2020 11:08:31

> Over the weekend Kotliar shared how, for the past 14 days, this mysterious entity has consolidated a lower-bound of 720 thousand outputs, 5 MB per day, more than BitMEX. using 5MB per day puts Bitcoin on it's knees apparently. That's less than 1 hour of blocks.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 27, 2020 09:48:55

Ugh it's 2020, stop saying X will pay for your fees. Sure they're paying for your fees by taking 3% from your purchase to cover the fee costs. You purchased $1 of BTC and got 97% of your purchase after transacting for 3% with the Cash App.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 27, 2020 08:42:49

why would people go back to high fees?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 26, 2020 20:09:02

Sapping them tx fees from miners who actually secure the network to a private company campaigning against obvious scaling solutions to Bitcoin.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 26, 2020 19:02:24

Liquid is attached like a wart to Bitcoin, sapping its tx fees

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 26, 2020 19:01:39

this game is all about being efficient, finding the "right" ratios etc. Sure uranium is plentiful but it's fun making it work optimally.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/factorio on May 26, 2020 17:33:41

Were the fluid calculations moved to separate threads? Are Nuclear heat pipes UPS calculated on a separate thread independent of the main logic?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/factorio on May 26, 2020 14:44:14

> To my knowledge, though, several of the non-interacting networks (electricity, heat, fluids) are updated in parallel. Electricity is near 0 UPS. Heat and fluids were parallelized on different threads in the experimental build but from what I hear from the Guru's of this game it's back to one thread now. I play basic seablock where all resources are extracted from water and was sad to hear the bad news confirmed. Apparently the factorio dev that was working to make fluids run on different threads left the company and the idea was put on the back burner.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/factorio on May 26, 2020 14:12:52

> I repeat: Noone has said blocksize will remain 1MB forever. Sure they will. even /r/bitcoin mod is keeping the narrative in control to avoid revisiting a blocksize increase: > Why would there be another debate after the conclusion has already been reached? Bitcoin doubled its max block size since then and has deployed Lightning Network and sidechains. People who want centralized gigablocks can go use a random altcoin with 2% hashrate and falling. You're out of touch and as usual downplaying and pushing misinformation at the horrible state Bitcoin has been put in thanks to Blockstream.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 26, 2020 14:08:43

> Control system prevents fuel wastage Nice. This is at the top of my list but most Nuclear blueprints don't look at this metric. When Factorio moves fluids to another CPU thread I'll start using reactors, until then 100% solar :/

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/factorio on May 26, 2020 13:41:27

> Most flagship Android phones also don't have expendable storage though so really the same deal. lolwut? Samsung flagships still have the sd card slot.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/applesucks on May 26, 2020 11:46:16

tx's = transactions. Bitcoin hasn't been able to clear it's mempool since May 6th actually now that I look at it. Since the halving Bitcoin has lost anywhere between 15%-30% of it's hashrate, blocks are pumping 5 per hour instead of 6 which compounds the issue and Bitcoin has been clogged since. Some poor suckers have waited over 20 days for their transactions to have confirmed simply because the rich get priority on Bitcoin. Last week to get confirmed within the hour costs $5-$6. The Bitcoin Core client default is to evict tx's over 14 days unless you keep retransmitting them so it's become unreliable at this point too. Even now you're looking at a 60+ blocks of backlog to clear which is close to 10 hours, **assuming no one creates more transactions in the next 10 hours to clear**. As we know the mempool hasn't cleared for over 20 days now. You can view Bitcoin's backlog here:,30d Bitcoin Cash doesn't have this problem because we have 32x bigger blocks. BCH did Bitcoin's record daily tx count times 4 without breaking a sweat and doesn't require a buggy 2nd layer hack of centralized solutions that Blockstream is pushing like Liquid. Bitcoin Cash just works!

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 26, 2020 11:27:38

txs have literally been stuck in Bitcoin for 2 weeks. Blockstream is selling a private solution that solves all of Bitcoin's problems.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 26, 2020 10:56:09

yes it seems related to the art order bug, probably some internal ID is used at times.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 26, 2020 10:06:31

I'm compiling a bunch of UI "seams" issues. In short all of these issues are basically the "seems" showing between server and client level syncing and the client waiting for a server confirmation. From my list so far: - Loading/Unloading arts causes hiccups which delays ts's when dumping arts midway through red stars. This issues seems independent of planet "fullness" and is just related to syncing server and lite client. In this case the client waits for a server confirmation before actually dropping the art on the planet - Arts shuffling around when loading/unloading. Sometimes you want to load 2 purples, but load other colors because the arts shuffle for no reason. - In Red stars when loading arts you can queue to a waypoint so that the TS automatically moves, but if you do it fast enough despite hitting "move once arts are fully loaded" sometimes the lite client does the "move in 10 seconds" instead, yet it seems to be a client side issue. - Blue star ship moving with something like high level time warp is very janky, as we can see the ship kind of jerk back a tiny bit. My guess is here the server and client have shipmovement speeds slightly mismatched. Theres a bunch more, but there's are the main ones.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 26, 2020 08:54:37

Stop spreading fud you idiot []( Why are you engaing in a campaign to twist Rigers words lol > Roger also clearly stated he believed BCH had a better chance of economic freedom for the world, clearly described BSV's many problems, and said in the interview that if BSV did succeed, he might just retire and leave cryptocurrency altogether. Please stop fudding.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 25, 2020 15:09:06

I did get the setup but it gave me the same signal strength as the omnidirectional antenna just placed in a window. Top speeds are 10Mpb/s down and 3Mbp/s up I tried various antenna angles and directions and checked cellmapper for cell towers but in the end I couldn't get a noticable boost over the omnidirectional antenna.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Calyx on May 25, 2020 10:16:04

How did you work out your sweetspot?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Calyx on May 24, 2020 14:45:42

how do sizes and price scale? as well as time rented on IPFS?

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 22, 2020 15:06:26

yeah but then how can Blockstream sell a privatized solution when Bitcoin is allowed to scale? Early bitcoiners warned of such leechers off Bitcoin

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 22, 2020 12:25:39

yes. and if you find that the MIFI 8000 is slowly draining it's battery you buy a powered usb 3.0 hub and connect it in between the mifi and the Glink and the hub will provide proper charging power

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/Calyx on May 21, 2020 09:23:14

It's from your own link silly

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 20, 2020 19:24:11

> 100% of the bitcoin mining pools signaled support for SegWit, Mining pools, not nodes signaling that peaked at 30%. Learn to read revisionist.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 20, 2020 18:54:44

> Gosh I hate to make you look like a total idiot but lots of phones from all brands have notches and even more are coming to market. Thanks to Apple. Now full screen is downgraded because thin. Thanks Apple.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 20, 2020 18:11:47

> But it still does not add up as I just don't see how it would be effective at preventing a fork from being majority lol history proves you wrong. Back when the scaling debate was on, the argument at least by Blockstream's and Bitcoin Core's view was that users not miners vote. Ironically SegWit signaling never peaked past 30%, and ultimately it was the miners who signed an agreement to do SegWit2x and therefore voted via blocks to active SegWit during the SegWit voting period. Yet when Bitcoin Classic nodes signalled past 50% they got ddosed and somehow the main Bitcoin channels censored discussion of majority signalling for Bitcoin Classic. Yet SegWit signaling peaking at 30% apparently was consensus.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/btc on May 20, 2020 16:19:14

> This is good reward for regular players but not so much incencitive, I'm nearly ready to run rs7 and the rs7 reward is a bit lower than my bls reward, plus it's position don't make it easy to grab. Disagree. I too am currently an RS7 player and it changed my daily habit already. Before the patch I had my red star scanner at lvl9 for maximum white star rewards. However I never ever ran any RS9 because obviously I can't handle it. Every since the patch came out 1st day I ran RS7 for the croid, just to see how it's gotten. Next 2 days I've ran RS9's for maximum croid rewards. At my level I in 24 hours I get 400k in shipment rewards + ~160k-200k in daily BLS credit win, for a total of ~600k in credits. A croid from rs9 gives me another 229k which is about ~38% increase in rewards, which is huge.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 20, 2020 15:43:38

thank you. I want to thank my 3rd grade teacher for helping me remember the 4 cardinal directions with the mnemonic, "Never Eat Soggy Waffles" and my 4th grade teacher for teaching me 3 digit whole number division.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/FortniteCompetitive on May 20, 2020 15:36:36

disagree with what? I agree with you, the patch will probably hurt private RS as per your explanation but public RS might see an even flow of players versus just playing on the weekend.

Commented by /u/500239 in /r/HadesStar on May 20, 20