5 ms·

Highly misleading. This runs on an alternative network called Bitcoin SV. It's most definitely not Bitcoin, but a fork of a fork of a fork. Amusing really, bec

by apo 7y ago

Highly misleading. This runs on an alternative network called Bitcoin SV. It's most definitely not Bitcoin, but a fork of a fork of a fork. Amusing really, because the "SV" stands for Satoshi's vision. The founder, Craig Wright has been bamboozling people for a long time with his nonsense. It's so long ago that most have forgotten, but the real Satoshi weighed in on a pretty heated argument about whether the Bitcoin block chain should be used to store DNS records. Satoshi was against it due to scaling concerns. The project went on to create its own network and blockchain called Namecoin. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1790.msg28917#msg28917 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1790.msg28917#msg289... I would take this project in the same spirit. Someone created a block chain and network for mass data storage. At least that's the goal. The result is what you see, but it's not Bitcoin.

shilch 7y ago
It uses "Bitcoin" to refer to the protocol, not the BTC network. People fought about the name "Bitcoin" for ages and everybody has their own opinion about this topic. The network that you refer to as Bitcoin has forked several times as well and least resembles the original protocol and idea when compared to BCH or BSV. OTOH the market values it the highest. > Someone created a block chain and network for mass data storage. I don't like the phrase of storing data on the chain. The blockchain is not a storage medium but a network that incentivised connectivity and data propagation.
- kinghajj 7y ago
  Except for an early hard fork due to a transaction verification bug that allowed for infinite Bitcoins to be created, the main Bitcoin chain, as implemented by the Bitcoin Core client, has never forked, to my knowledge. It also seems disingenuous to claim that it doesn't resemble the original protocol, when the block size cap that the forks adjust, was put into place by Satoshi himself.
  - RustyRussell 7y ago
    FWIW, that was a soft fork, since it's backward compatible. It did cause a brief chain fork, however.
  - onion-soup 7y ago
    Bitcoin core altered the protocol by removing instant transactions and adding segwit. So it’s not bitcoin anymore
    - kinghajj 7y ago
      "Removing instant transactions?" Do you mean "the GUI shows 0-conf transactions as pending?" And why does adding Segwit make it "not bitcoin anymore"? Further, the Bitcoin Core devs didn't alter the protocol, the miners and users did by using the voting mechanism to enable Segwit, entirely of their own volition.
      - shilch 7y ago
        > Do you mean "the GUI shows 0-conf transactions as pending? It's not just GUI but also a miner policy which can break the use of BTC as cash - as it was originally intended. > And why does adding Segwit make it "not bitcoin anymore"? It's an ugly addition to the original protocol that among others breaks the definition of a coin as a chain of digital signatures. This might lead to legal issues as some people (including lawyers) pointed out.
      - satuenpoo 7y ago
        SegWit changes the system from a "chain of digital signatures" to a "chain of hashes (witnesses)" The white paper and original protocol is crystal clear that a "Bitcoin is a chain of digital signatures"
  - CraigIsSatoshi 7y ago
    Greg Maxwell having a conversation with himself it seems. Bitcoin is BSV. Craig Wright is Satoshi. BTC is air dropped scam of Bitcoin.
  - shilch 7y ago
    BTC hard forked twice (or thrice if you count the one accidental hard fork) and soft forked a dozens of times. Claiming that BTC is the "main chain" is misleading. The main chain is dead for years; run the original bitcoin client, it won't sync up.
- ghostpepper 7y ago
  It's actually the very first text on the page: > Did you know that you can upload files directly to the Bitcoin network, as permanent, immutable, and monetizable Bitcoin transactions?
- onion-soup 7y ago
  You realize bitcoin core can’t scale? It literally can only process 4 tx/s whereas original bitcoin (bsv) can do thousands of tx/s
franlellsl 7y ago
The network itself has no name. The network protocol has a name - Bitcoin. The exchange ticker BTC is for the altered Bitcoin protocol now called Bitcoin Core or Segwit. The exchange ticker BSV is for the restored (not fully restored yet) Bitcoin protocol. The bottle browser and the whole Metanet can only run on the original Bitcoin protocol which is supported by the node software developed by nChain named Bitcoin SV.
- rolltiide 7y ago
  BSV is for an old version of the bitcoin protocol. People launch these daily. There is a pre-2013 patch version of the bitcoin protocol too. People play around with it for kicks, because the exploits are already known. Maybe some exchange trades it. This is just called an old version, due to consensus. Ideology is just a distraction.
  - ghostpepper 7y ago
    There are quite a few projects being built using BitcoinSV compared to any of the other "old versions" though, right?
    - rolltiide 7y ago
      I never compared that specific thing and dont care to. If I have a file so hot that I cant even store it on Mega or a free decentralized storage file system Then I know that BitcoinSV is a public dumping ground I can use
- asciimo 7y ago
  Bitcoin (BTC) is Bitcoin. Saying it's "altered" is like saying that Hacker News is "altered" because its code has evolved over the years. Saying BSV is the "restored" Bitcoin protocol is like saying retrohackernews.com is the "restored" Hacker News because it runs on an old fork of Hacker News. That doesn't make it Hacker News. I'm not saying that Bitcoin has become good or bad; I'm saying it's Bitcoin. BSV folks spend a lot of time and bytes trying to convince others that they're the real deal, and that Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto. It doesn't matter. If BSV is superior to Bitcoin, it should prevail through its own merit, not through language gymnastics in online forums.
marsface 7y ago
I think that what is misleading is to say that what is not BTC is not bitcoin. Also misleading is to call the metanet or bottle "DNS in the blockchain" and to try to make a broken syllogism using a post by Satoshi, pushing people to think that satoshi would be against bottle or metanet. Please, I recommend anyone who do not want to be limited by the mind police to dig more and think for themselves.
ghostpepper 7y ago
Seems like there are a lot of people caught up in whether or not Craig Wright is a fraudster or a genius and not a lot of people evaluating Bitcoin SV and the various projects being built for it on their own merit.
mrsnuffy 7y ago
Bitcoin SV is most definitely bitcoin. It is simply the original bitcoin protocol, ie. with all the stupid things that were added to "BTC" since 2009 removed. ... that makes it infinitely scalable and useful like bitcoin was supposed to be, not just for money, for data storage, and for computation. No Segwit No RBF No block size limit No limits on scripts or data sizes BTC is useless in comparison... and the 'ad hominem' will only cover this up for so long.
- apo 7y ago
  > It is simply the original bitcoin protocol, ie. with all the stupid things that were added to "BTC" since 2009 removed. Bitcoin SV clearly introduced many changes. But those changes are backward-incompatible for Bitcoin nodes, meaning that every one of them will reject an SV block. It really doesn't matter what you think about the wisdom of what was added since 2009. All that matters is that Bitcoin nodes will ignore the blocks. Experimentation is all well and good. But fringe groups breaking the protocol willy-nilly then claiming the result as Bitcoin is misleading at best. That's what I was pointing out. It's a tactic used repeatedly by SV advocates including Wright. His involvement is relevant given the extraordinary nature of his claims and the deliberately misleading nature of his proof. > No Segwit No RBF No block size limit No limits on scripts or data sizes Scaling is so very easy when users are scarce.
  - voodoosurfer 7y ago
    You're talking about BTC, not BitCoin.
chachachoney 7y ago
> I would take this project in the same spirit. Someone created a block chain and network for mass data storage. At least that's the goal. The result is what you see, but it's not Bitcoin. Truth. Looks like the astroturfing cultist invasion has already started. Interesting exercise for the community: Cross reference any post in this thread making hyperbolic assertions or expressing wildly optimistic sentiments -- with account creation or a clear lack of activity elsewhere on the forum, and spend karma accordingly.

by apo 7y ago

shilch 7y ago

It uses "Bitcoin" to refer to the protocol, not the BTC network. People fought about the name "Bitcoin" for ages and everybody has their own opinion about this topic. The network that you refer to as Bitcoin has forked several times as well and least resembles the original protocol and idea when compared to BCH or BSV. OTOH the market values it the highest. > Someone created a block chain and network for mass data storage. I don't like the phrase of storing data on the chain. The blockchain is not a storage medium but a network that incentivised connectivity and data propagation.

kinghajj 7y ago
Except for an early hard fork due to a transaction verification bug that allowed for infinite Bitcoins to be created, the main Bitcoin chain, as implemented by the Bitcoin Core client, has never forked, to my knowledge. It also seems disingenuous to claim that it doesn't resemble the original protocol, when the block size cap that the forks adjust, was put into place by Satoshi himself.
- RustyRussell 7y ago
  FWIW, that was a soft fork, since it's backward compatible. It did cause a brief chain fork, however.
- onion-soup 7y ago
  Bitcoin core altered the protocol by removing instant transactions and adding segwit. So it’s not bitcoin anymore
  - kinghajj 7y ago
    "Removing instant transactions?" Do you mean "the GUI shows 0-conf transactions as pending?" And why does adding Segwit make it "not bitcoin anymore"? Further, the Bitcoin Core devs didn't alter the protocol, the miners and users did by using the voting mechanism to enable Segwit, entirely of their own volition.
    - shilch 7y ago
      > Do you mean "the GUI shows 0-conf transactions as pending? It's not just GUI but also a miner policy which can break the use of BTC as cash - as it was originally intended. > And why does adding Segwit make it "not bitcoin anymore"? It's an ugly addition to the original protocol that among others breaks the definition of a coin as a chain of digital signatures. This might lead to legal issues as some people (including lawyers) pointed out.
    - satuenpoo 7y ago
      SegWit changes the system from a "chain of digital signatures" to a "chain of hashes (witnesses)" The white paper and original protocol is crystal clear that a "Bitcoin is a chain of digital signatures"
- CraigIsSatoshi 7y ago
  Greg Maxwell having a conversation with himself it seems. Bitcoin is BSV. Craig Wright is Satoshi. BTC is air dropped scam of Bitcoin.
- shilch 7y ago
  BTC hard forked twice (or thrice if you count the one accidental hard fork) and soft forked a dozens of times. Claiming that BTC is the "main chain" is misleading. The main chain is dead for years; run the original bitcoin client, it won't sync up.
ghostpepper 7y ago
It's actually the very first text on the page: > Did you know that you can upload files directly to the Bitcoin network, as permanent, immutable, and monetizable Bitcoin transactions?
onion-soup 7y ago
You realize bitcoin core can’t scale? It literally can only process 4 tx/s whereas original bitcoin (bsv) can do thousands of tx/s

franlellsl 7y ago

The network itself has no name. The network protocol has a name - Bitcoin. The exchange ticker BTC is for the altered Bitcoin protocol now called Bitcoin Core or Segwit. The exchange ticker BSV is for the restored (not fully restored yet) Bitcoin protocol. The bottle browser and the whole Metanet can only run on the original Bitcoin protocol which is supported by the node software developed by nChain named Bitcoin SV.

rolltiide 7y ago
BSV is for an old version of the bitcoin protocol. People launch these daily. There is a pre-2013 patch version of the bitcoin protocol too. People play around with it for kicks, because the exploits are already known. Maybe some exchange trades it. This is just called an old version, due to consensus. Ideology is just a distraction.
- ghostpepper 7y ago
  There are quite a few projects being built using BitcoinSV compared to any of the other "old versions" though, right?
  - rolltiide 7y ago
    I never compared that specific thing and dont care to. If I have a file so hot that I cant even store it on Mega or a free decentralized storage file system Then I know that BitcoinSV is a public dumping ground I can use
asciimo 7y ago
Bitcoin (BTC) is Bitcoin. Saying it's "altered" is like saying that Hacker News is "altered" because its code has evolved over the years. Saying BSV is the "restored" Bitcoin protocol is like saying retrohackernews.com is the "restored" Hacker News because it runs on an old fork of Hacker News. That doesn't make it Hacker News. I'm not saying that Bitcoin has become good or bad; I'm saying it's Bitcoin. BSV folks spend a lot of time and bytes trying to convince others that they're the real deal, and that Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto. It doesn't matter. If BSV is superior to Bitcoin, it should prevail through its own merit, not through language gymnastics in online forums.

marsface 7y ago

I think that what is misleading is to say that what is not BTC is not bitcoin. Also misleading is to call the metanet or bottle "DNS in the blockchain" and to try to make a broken syllogism using a post by Satoshi, pushing people to think that satoshi would be against bottle or metanet. Please, I recommend anyone who do not want to be limited by the mind police to dig more and think for themselves.

ghostpepper 7y ago

Seems like there are a lot of people caught up in whether or not Craig Wright is a fraudster or a genius and not a lot of people evaluating Bitcoin SV and the various projects being built for it on their own merit.

mrsnuffy 7y ago

Bitcoin SV is most definitely bitcoin. It is simply the original bitcoin protocol, ie. with all the stupid things that were added to "BTC" since 2009 removed. ... that makes it infinitely scalable and useful like bitcoin was supposed to be, not just for money, for data storage, and for computation. No Segwit No RBF No block size limit No limits on scripts or data sizes BTC is useless in comparison... and the 'ad hominem' will only cover this up for so long.

apo 7y ago
> It is simply the original bitcoin protocol, ie. with all the stupid things that were added to "BTC" since 2009 removed. Bitcoin SV clearly introduced many changes. But those changes are backward-incompatible for Bitcoin nodes, meaning that every one of them will reject an SV block. It really doesn't matter what you think about the wisdom of what was added since 2009. All that matters is that Bitcoin nodes will ignore the blocks. Experimentation is all well and good. But fringe groups breaking the protocol willy-nilly then claiming the result as Bitcoin is misleading at best. That's what I was pointing out. It's a tactic used repeatedly by SV advocates including Wright. His involvement is relevant given the extraordinary nature of his claims and the deliberately misleading nature of his proof. > No Segwit No RBF No block size limit No limits on scripts or data sizes Scaling is so very easy when users are scarce.
- voodoosurfer 7y ago
  You're talking about BTC, not BitCoin.

chachachoney 7y ago

> I would take this project in the same spirit. Someone created a block chain and network for mass data storage. At least that's the goal. The result is what you see, but it's not Bitcoin. Truth. Looks like the astroturfing cultist invasion has already started. Interesting exercise for the community: Cross reference any post in this thread making hyperbolic assertions or expressing wildly optimistic sentiments -- with account creation or a clear lack of activity elsewhere on the forum, and spend karma accordingly.