Mateus Lopes

Exactly! Also, at 7 TPS, even just opening/closing lightning channels to handle global scale would cause huge L1 congestions. BTC can not scale! A money so "hard" and heavy that it can not even move properly.... If Satoshi is alive, i think he is cryjng seeing what they made of BTC.

@MateusLopes @alwaysaimbig And the idea they rally behind a parasitic centralised L2 in Lightning to effectively use btc is beyond me and the absolute antithesis to Satoshi's vision

I'm a Bitcoin maxi but find Kaspa interesting. Ultimately it only cost me a few hundred dollars to buy the same % of supply I own that represents my dream BTC stack. If it goes to $0 who cares

@neons_neo @alwaysaimbig They dont! And they also wish BIP110 to censor more transaction volume. Unbelievable

@alwaysaimbig To the btc maxis .. real talk ... What's the solution to the security budget for btc? How are you going to keep the miners incentivised?

@Bitcoin_Core21 @alwaysaimbig Lucky him not to be in this close minded non sense maxi club. What a bunch of stupid maxi arguments on this thread. Zach should be proud of thinking for himself.

@alwaysaimbig You’re not a Bitcoin maxi so don’t label yourself one.. You’re a person that owns some Bitcoin and some shitcoins .. not a maxi

Great question! Bitcoin is supposed to save us from Fiat, but everybody thinks "to the moon in Fiat". 🚀🌕🤡

How much decentralization is enough? The most the better? Or is there a point in which decentralization exceeds the reasonable? Is there a time to maybe consider Bitcoin is becoming adult, and maybe it is time for node owners to also grow and invest some of their precious sats in a little more space? What is the cost of not having more economical activity compared to the cost of storage nowadays? Is there the real need to verify 25.000 times the same block, already verified by miner, every ten minutes again and again and again? If you honestly think about those question, you might discover that the network would continue being healthy and secure with a tenth of the actual number of nodes. Only miner nodes contribute to decentralization! Unpopular truth, but still truth.

If Bitcoin Core keeps opening up block space for arbitrary data, they are pushing Bitcoin in the direction of something like Ethereum, whether you want to admit it or not. Relaxing OP_RETURN makes it easier to fill blocks with non-monetary data. Even if it’s paid for, it still increases chain growth and raises the cost of running a full node over time. And that has real consequences: bigger nodes, fewer people able to run them, and more centralization. That’s not theory, that’s basic economics. So yeah, maybe it doesn’t flip a switch overnight, but direction matters. If Bitcoin keeps moving toward being a general data layer instead of focused money, you end up with the same scaling and centralization pressures we’ve already seen elsewhere.

If Bitcoin Core manages to make Bitcoin into ETH 2.0 it will go to zero. I hope you understand that. If you want to become free you need to fight!✊

@OrangeBumPill @WilliamShortss @marc02200 hahaha... I love Jax! Sorry for your head... Tsung!

@WilliamShortss @MateusLopes @marc02200

I am a Bitcoin maxi. Full stop. Nothing else comes close and I will die on that hill. But I want to hear from the people who disagree. The Ethereum people, the altcoin people, the gold people. Come into my comment section and make your best case. Because I genuinely want to understand the other side even if I know I'm not changing my mind. Let's go.

@WilliamShortss @OrangeBumPill @marc02200 Right! I am not trying to convince you about BSV. You have your points. We are just debating. Thanks for your words. Time will tell... and I don't think I could not be wrong. But I hope not. hahaha...

@MateusLopes @OrangeBumPill @marc02200 Don’t get me wrong, I’m bearish on BSV because I believe it’s smoke and mirrors with marketing gimmicks more than substance. The pie charts I’ve seen countless times before, then back to no volume again. If you need BSV or it’s useful to you, I’m happy for you.

No! Mining nodes should never be centralized. What I said is that home nodes don't play the role they think they do. And no! Satoshi should never be misrepresented. We all have his published words to research and draw our own conclusions. So, in the end, you're being disingenuous with my words, is that it? As we say, not what we do? Hypocrisy! And Bye By the way!

@MateusLopes @marc02200 The crux of the debate rests with nodes; you have made it clear you are fine with node centralization and I have made it clear that I am not. You have also made it clear that you're willing to cherry-pick and misrepresent what Satoshi actually wrote. I'm pulling the rip cord.

Right! All of this is also true. It is really hard to be on BSV. There are so many reasons for that. All those business really made lots of transactions, but they closed anyway. But it is noticeable what they could do while they were alive. The proof of concepts! All their legacy had contributed to the BSV ecosystem become much more mature, how it is today. BSV still do not have the adoption, we can not lie, but the potential instigates me as a developer. There are so many use cases that doesn't even need people to touch BSV. You can sell immutable data services, transparency, digital assets, and other stuff, and still not requiring your clients to touch on Bitcoin SV. Saylor is doing this with BTC... selling papers to people that don't want to touch BTC, right? The same goes to onchain utility services. You can sell logs settlement services for a company, and never make them touch on any coin. Just a random pick example... But, whatever, I think we done here. I typed enough and have my work to do.

@MateusLopes @OrangeBumPill @marc02200 Over the years all of these have pumped huge transaction volumes where BSVers kept posting the pie chart believing that adoption was picking up. None of them are producing transactions on BSV today. It was only 1 month ago BSV had its lowest 24h transaction volume ever.

You are right again! But, this is also temporary and can change with time, if the use case really proves the utility of being able to handle the volume and scale the world needs. Also, the kind of economical activity happening on BSV opens to hundres of possibilities that are just impossible in BTC. The hard money is trying to be so hard, that no other use case will penetrate it. So be it! In fiat volume BTC wins, in bytes volume BSV wins by far. Do you know Bitcoin fees is in "Satoshi per Byte". To miners, that is gold. So, BTC might have more fiat volume, but not more digital volume. And, that has some great implications. Bitcoin SV is not competing with BTC anymore. The competition is over. One wants to be a money giant, the other wants to be the global utility ledger. Both are born from the same womb. Until sometime they were one, the same "digital blood", but they forked and chosen different paths. We will see. Thanks Will!

@MateusLopes @OrangeBumPill @marc02200 Bitcoin is used far more for economic activity than BSV. Shops, hotels, restaurants, travel and many other industries accept Bitcoin for payment. I haven’t found any that accept BSV for payment yet.

@OrangeBumPill @WilliamShortss @marc02200 When facts are taken as fantasies, who is the one living in fantasy? The one seeing the facts or the one calling them fantasy?

@WilliamShortss @MateusLopes @marc02200 Thank you for the reality check, I appreciate it. This dude is living in fantasy land.

@WilliamShortss @OrangeBumPill @marc02200 It is coming!

@MateusLopes @OrangeBumPill @marc02200 1 million TPS is impressive if it’s real users paying to use the chain for real economic transactions. Sustained over time. 1 million TPS on testnet is not as impressive and appears to just be used as a marketing gimmick.

@OrangeBumPill @marc02200 Or maybe is just about our different cultures that makes me interpret words bad? Why this looks offensive to me? Whatever. Thanks Giant Orange Suppository, I hope nobody sits on you.

@MateusLopes @marc02200 Mischaracterizing optionality as dispensability is disingenuous, bud. You're using a crude shoehorn to make a point.

I think I have a strong basement to say what I am saying. I am a senior software engineer, I have been into bitcoin and blockchain for a long time, just like you bro. Different visions are alright. Maybe we should keep on arguments, not on acusations. If you want to explain and refute my points, I am here to have a good conversation. But, do not acuse me morally. Not elegant, not fair. Unless you are concrete enough to prove and sustain motivations for personal acusations.

@MateusLopes @marc02200 You're being disingenuous and cherry-picking only those writings which agree with your conclusion; Satoshi had more to say on this than what I've posted, you clearly haven't looked into this fully. See, I did go down this rabbit hole and so I can see things from your perspective

@OrangeBumPill @marc02200 Is this a refutation? 🙉

@MateusLopes @marc02200 BSV's gigablock cartel proves the opposite.

You don't care about the base layer? Ok! I do. Final settlement, immutable, signed and verifiable, is where the value resides. You do care about security? Yeah! Me too. But, how much is enough? You do care about decentralization? Perfect! Me too. But, how much is enough either? And what is real decentralization? Listening nodes? 😂 I know how painful can be to dismiss old beliefs. But it is time to.

@MateusLopes @marc02200 I don't care about base layer speed, I care about the security and decentralization of the base layer above all else; as Satoshi himself did.

Right! I said "BSV has reached 1 million TPS in recent benchmarks...", and it is true, but i took the "benchmark" word as if it was implicit that it means about tests. As benchmark is a word very used for testing and performance measuring in software development. But you are right in fixing my comunication mistake. English is not my native language, so I know make many mistakes. Sorry! Anyway, 1 million TPS is still impressive, even in testnet.

@MateusLopes @OrangeBumPill @marc02200 You say in this post that BSV has reached 1 million TPS. All I’m saying is that according to the BSV blockchain explorer whatsonchain.com the highest TPS number BSV has achieved was 1350 TPS. I don’t compare BSV to Bitcoin. They are 2 completely different things.

It looks like "Number Go Up" is also about nodes... 😂 #BTC #Bitcoin #BIP110 #Knots #Decentralization

@WilliamShortss @OrangeBumPill @marc02200 1350/7 = 192.85 So you are saying BSV is 192.85x faster than BTC! And also 4700x cheaper than BTC? What a deal!

@MateusLopes @OrangeBumPill @marc02200 Whatsonchain.com shows the BSV blockchain (BSV) has reached a maximum of 1350 TPS in the last 3 years.