>is he or isn't he?
>why did he do what he did in 2015?
Craig wright
Joseph Long
Other urls found in this thread:
slop.systems
towardsdatascience.com
bitinfocharts.com
vu.hn
twitter.com
p2pfoundation.ning.com
online.wsj.com
cs.cornell.edu
satoshisvisionconference.com
twitter.com
youtube.com
reddit.com
steemit.com
twitter.com
Carson Wood
Fucking hard to say, there are solid facts proving his early involvement in bitcoin, there are also weird things like him back editing his blog. I don't know.
Sebastian Robinson
He is. People don't like to admit it because he's a finance jerk instead of a tech niceguy. No one would doubt him if he looked and spoke like Vitalik instead of like a trader who does 6 lines of coke for breakfast.
Jordan Reed
also, if craig *is* satoshi, does this mean that bch is going to curbstomp btc? been going deep down the rabbit hole mining his twitter for info recently.
Jacob Nguyen
To be honest, I dislike BCH for one single reason: patents. That goes against my philosophy. Giving power to ASIC cartels in the long term is not so good either.
Even if he is *the one*, that is not an authority to be these days
Jeremiah Morales
*not an authority to me
Jonathan Sanders
i'm disappointed, son.
Kayden Price
He'll be gaining control of the Tulip trust in 2020, just in time for the halvening. After that, all bets are off.
Bitcoin Cash doesn't seem very serious, though. It's mediocre and Ver won't even hire a bunch of developers to improve it to the point that it's better than Bitcoin. The whole thing smells of the Libertarian obsession with power and control.
Michael Peterson
yeah dude. It's pretty obvious that the battle has already been won. They are using BTC to siphon off fiat from investors (retail and institutional) but once Jihan and Craig get bored of that the good doctor will convert the genesis block to BCH.
Ayden Murphy
wright has been very emphatic that he does not want to share his sandbox--that there is no room in the future for multiple cryptos. further, that if btc had been competently administered, there would never have been anything like the present alt boom. there also is the issue of that bitcoin *needs* to establish its hegemony within the next 8 years or else it is going to perish, due to the mining economics. this means getting it established as a *real* currency, not just a medium of speculation. there needs to be transaction volume to both keep miners mining but also keep per tx fees as small (near 0) as possible. bitcoin will die if it can't do this. so i get the patent perspective.
re: asics: we're not going back to bobby mining on his 1060. asics raise the barriers to entry, which is arguably a good thing. it becomes harder to bring a burst of new compute online temporarily in order to manipulate the network.