2
sillBag 2 points ago +2 / -0

For real, it’s getting to be annoying actually.

I’m also sick of people posting stuff from weeks ago as if it’s breaking news.

I feel like we have people in the community who are either purposefully forum sliding, or, they are just dumb.

Both are bad.

4
sillBag 4 points ago +4 / -0

I’m almost certain this is real, but I see zero issue with it. Trump has done multiple things like this over the years, and I have to ask, who tf cares? It has no bearing on anything.

Side note: They are very nice watches. So it’s not like it’s a scam or anything like that. Just a business man doing business things. The things our President should be doing for America.

0
sillBag 0 points ago +1 / -1

Bitcoin has gone from $450 - $63,000 in the same timeframe.

Gold and silver are great, but the real growth is happening elsewhere.

Don’t be left in the dust.

3
sillBag 3 points ago +3 / -0

It’s pretty bad when I can’t tell if this is real or troll hahahaha

44
sillBag 44 points ago +44 / -0

I’m shocked that Katt’s still alive to be honest.

You just know that he pissed off a LOT of demons when he did this interview.

1
sillBag 1 point ago +1 / -0

I think he's saying it as a bit of a joke because those 2 cities are riddled with crime.

4
sillBag 4 points ago +4 / -0

Agree, it was funny.

It was also 3 years ago.

Why are you posting this today? :D

1
sillBag 1 point ago +2 / -1

So shocked sarcasm

I warned against XRP a while back and a bunch of XRP Stan’s tried to say I was wrong.

Maximum kek.

XRP is not a blockchain, it is a CENTRALIZED digital ledger…. It is fully controllable.

2
sillBag 2 points ago +2 / -0

Pretty sure he gets secret service protection, does he not?

1
sillBag 1 point ago +1 / -0

It’s feasible if the govt pays all of the big pools simultaneously to do their bidding.

It’s also possible the govt shuts down the exchanges

It’s also possible the govt enforces ISP’s to block BTC node packets.

But … imo…. None of this is really feasible to achieve on a global scale… for example many of the largest nations have to come together and agree on it…. I’m talking about China, Russia, USA, India… all deciding and agreeing on something together…. That is unfeasible.

All of this was a lot more feasible before 2017… but today, the amount of additional power and resources that would be required… is too great… and the collaboration between enemy nations… is too improbable.

Btw what is the entire point of this argument we are having… are you a gold/silver maximalist? Not dogging you if you are, just wondering why are we arguing to begin with hahah

1
sillBag 1 point ago +1 / -0

I’m not refusing to comprehend anything, you are refusing to catch my point I guess.

A 51% attack cannot change the rules of the network. They could engage in a fork and create a new network with the new rules, but it does not mean the original network ceases to exist.

So yes they could 51% attack to fork and create a new network that has abilities to censor transactions.

But the original Bitcoin network that I AM TALKING ABOUT, can not be changed, not without a community consensus to upgrade the protocol and adopt the change. Which is when all miners of the old network would switch to the new network. Any upgrade BIP that involves censorship, is never going to pass the consensus.

1
sillBag 1 point ago +1 / -0

A 51% attack and having 51% of the hashpower are two very different things.

A 51% attack can cause a fork in the chain, which has happened before, infact it’s effectively how BCH and BSV came into existence. Having 51% of the horsepower does not mean you will be the miner of every block.

If it’s a 51% attack to fork, it does not mean they can change the rules of the chain they forking, they can only change the rules on their new fork, on their own chain.

I’m not ‘strawmanning’ anything, what you are trying to argue as possible censorship is downright bullshit lol, none of your ‘arguments’ matter, because no matter what as long as there are miners on the chain, eventually your transaction will get picked up. Regardless if the biggest pools are trying to ignore your transaction or block.

But hey what do I know… I’ve only lived off of, and developed on blockchains for 8 years.

1
sillBag 1 point ago +1 / -0

That’s not true about 51%, it would just mean I may need to wait twice as long for my transaction to go through.

They would need 100% of the hashpower, which is impossible to achieve due to at home private miners, and other large pools.

1
sillBag 1 point ago +1 / -0

They cannot remove addresses from the mempool.

This proves my exact point.

Just because they won’t mine blocks with those transactions, doesn’t mean nobody else can.

They are simply only hurting their revenue.

Which is why they stopped doing it.

What you are worried about, would be more feasible in the early days of bitcoin where there wasn’t millions of individual miners not associated to any pool.

1
sillBag 1 point ago +1 / -0

It should be noted that Marathon is mining “compliant” blocks of its own volition and that nothing in the current U.S. regulatory or legal code explicitly mandates that practice for miners. >

They are only mining blocks That are compliant, meaning that contain no transactions from known bad actors.

They are just costing their business revenue that another miner will gladly scoop up.

Which is why they stopped:

https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2021/05/31/bitcoin-miner-marathon-will-no-longer-censor-transactions-ceo-says/

view more: Next ›