/biz/ - Business & Finance

For everything else, there's mastercard

>>29548816
Now do probably decentralized consensus. 1 in 10^18 blocks...

is something actually happening
https://twitter.com/murphsicles/status/1364487319718354945

>>29548816
Is he the worst thing to happen to BTC?

>>29548816

Tell me more neckbeard the wise.

>>29548844
Kek. Thats nuts to think mastercard got a marketshare with that corny catch phrase compared to VISA

Its not if its closed source and people are required to use a special device to mine it maybe.

>>29550621
he contributed a fucking lot. his cashie trolling aside he is a great dev. basically bitcoin had 3 major improvements to the protocol first was p2sh by gavin then it was segwit by multiple devs (soft fork idea by lukejr) and finally taproot which was maxwells idea as far as i can tell.

>>29551547
that's not how they got their market share at all.
it's market protectionism basically when you go into a european bank almost all cards offered at a reasonable fee will be mastercard.

>>29551972
TIL FAGGOT

>>29551888
Nice try Gregory
>great dev
>names 1 that got banned by Gregory
>names segwit which is the worst thing that happened
>names taproot as Gregory idea when he was against it and proposed Graftroot instead

you're literally a nigger

>>29552074
segwit is the most logical thing that happened to bitcoin it opened up so many possibilities for optimization and off-chain scaling.

p2sh is basically all about putting the concern to define the unlock script contract to the receiver.

segwit is about separating the financial transaction from the sigscript so they can be handled separately as the financial transaction is needed for longer than the sigscript and much smaller than a potentially huge and complex multisig contract. it logically builds on p2sh.

taproot allows you to define arbitrarily large contracts executing with minimal on-chain burden and of course. it builds on segwit.

these things stack together and people often forget that we can thank gavin for the first step.

>>29552318

>>29548816
>laughs in xmr

>>29552074
>Graftroot is an improvement designed to expand the capabilities of Taproot
not exactly huh?

>>29552318
>off-chain scaling
just use mastercard, as for example adam back said, did you forget? and not 100% sure but i also think you said that once or twice...

>>29552318
>>29552396
my brain is wonderful

>>29552347
this roy murphy is a fucking retarded schizo who always posts made up bullshit but i would be interested in what gamification he hints there.

is there an article or something? or at least a link to the tx?

>>29552488
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/6fa49c8c13abc65eab8bd6249d386ee85a203b9812661e57f44528d4e975a855

>>29552396
no what i mean by off-chain scaling is stuff like transferring your coins between exchanges and services instantly without delay or waiting in the mempool for basically no fee.

if only major exchanges adopted lightning already about 60% of the transactions on layer-1 would not exist.

>>29552540
>Use LN goy
Yes, because your LN patent says that Bitcoin code is broken and can't scale, which is factually wrong.

Back to
>I have proven decentralized consensus is impossible.

>>29548816
>We're too weak to do it, therefore it's impossible

>>29552517
so nothing as usual
>I'm still getting my head around how the 3 transactions today relate to how a double spend is performed. Looking at lots of variables on-the-fly.
the fucking brainlet...

>>29552774
dude he obviously admitted he was wrong about that one. if you read that sentence in the context perhaps...
he thought he proved leaderless decentralized consensus is impossible to protect from a sibyl attack.
then bitcoin came and he was like uhh.

>>29553047
still true for dags and shit imo. without proof of work all of these newfag consensus protocols can be raped unless there are special validator nodes or any other form of leadership.

>>29552774
the ln solves centralization is total bullshit (or i don't know what you are getting at)
it simply solves bulk settlement.
you could incorporate a hundred thousand transactions between 2 exchanges in a single tx and most of the bulk of that tx would be in the segwit extension block.

>>29550494
I recommend putting on twitter notifications for this guy today... you'll know why soon.

>>29553538
>soon
can't take it anymore

>>29553568
Thing are going to get fucking SPICY from toda... I mean very very soon.

>>29552963
okay so without knowing what the absolute brainlet ray murphy is trying to hint at there is three things about that tx:
1) it has no timelock (aside from being a coinbase)
2) there is no difference between a type 1 or type 3 output
3) if you ommit witness from your tx with type 3 input it will not make it to a valid block or if a miner still includes it it will be rejected by the network and get reorged

and nobody accepts unconfirmed bitcoin transactions despite what sv cucks are imagining. there is only probabilistic finality to bitcoin transactions.

>>29553148
Wrong again you fucknig disgusting bitcoin maxi

Avalanche fucks your in the ass

>>29553661
yeah I'm watching. I haven't sold my alts and all inned bsv though

>>29548816
Why are BSV bagholders so obsessed with this guy?

>>29553713
no there is no way for a leaderless dag to protect from sibyl attacks. your network security is laughable can be attacked for a few thousand bucks.

holy shit BSV is actually down in $ value since last march

no wonder you guys shit up the board

those bags are HEAVY

>>29548816

>>29553681
you sound a little unsure?

>>29551972
Can confirm. Literally every bank debit card here is from Maestro.

>>29554329
Someone gotta ask..

What is a sidecar?

>>29554686
side chains i think

>>29554329
i'm unsure of what the fuck he is trying to imply as that tx has nothing unusual on it.

>>29554329
how many years old that picture is?

>>29555648
It's fresh off the presses.

>>29552347
for anyone not fluent in autism, what the fuck does all that mean?

>>29556159
something like btc is fatally flawed and can be infinitely forked because of segwit

>>29555893
those are not even the same posts lmao

>>29556536
that sentence makes no sense whatsoever.
there is two way to fork a coin.
1) some nodes start runing a different ruleset that is mutually invalid for the rest of nodes and thus the 2 chains deviate from each other.
2) same thing happens but without a change in code because of faulty consensus rules like in bcash where they ignore reorgs deeper than 10 but there is no guarantee that all nodes will receive the same blocks in the same order so a permanent network split may occur.

with btc theoretically the network could split to 2 forks 1 enforcing segwit ruleset and the other not. however segwit ruleset is valid under the old consensus ruleset so for a permanent split to occur majority of the hashrate should abandon enforcing the segwit rules.
about 99% of the nodes and pretty much all miners enforce segwit ruleset. so that's not happening.

>>29557716
>Q: If you can simply create a chain tip fork by leveraging LockTime, SegWit and RBF from type 1 addresses, how many unresolved forks could you create by looping outputs into other inputs that repeat, especially if they're pre-planned and co-ordinated via block height?
https://twitter.com/murphsicles/status/1364508896468041730

>>29558013
none

here is the thing
1) locktime simply not allows the tx to be included in a block until a block height so you can't spend whatever outputs it has anyhow.
2) rbf allows for a tx to be replaced before being included in a block so it's not possible to use it to fork anything once a tx is confirmed rbf play absolutely no role. both first seen rule and rbf are anti-spam measures btw. they try to keep the mempool manageable at size if someone would like to spam conflicting transactions. neither of them guarantees anything tho.
3) segwit has nothing to do with any of that anyhow there is no way in hell you could not do the same with legacy addresses (and fail just the same)