William Short

@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.

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.

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.

@MateusLopes @OrangeBumPill @marc02200 The fact is that the BSV blockchain has only ever achieved 1350 TPS at its highest. I believe SOL, Kaspa and quite a few others do far more transactions.

@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?

@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.

@MateusLopes @OrangeBumPill @marc02200 Please forgive me for believing otherwise. Over the years I have seen BSV pump transactions many times only for a month later for those transactions to completely die off.

@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.

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.

@JuicyTbone369 @16bit_kaspa Using your link, it shows the Teranode testnet latest block height is 8293. The current block height of the BSV blockchain is 941,662. These are two different chains. The 1 million TPS you spoke about don’t appear on the BsV blockchain. If you think they do, what block?

@WilliamShortss @16bit_kaspa Teranode is node software integrated with the BSV blockchain. It’s not a separate chain; it just runs within BSV to enhance scalability and performance

🔥#Bitcoin holders when they hear about #Kaspa's superior technology.

@JuicyTbone369 @16bit_kaspa None of those claimed transactions are on the BSV blockchain. The Teranode testnet and the BSV blockchain are not the same chain.

@WilliamShortss @16bit_kaspa teranode.bsvblockchain.org/updates/6nodes…

@JuicyTbone369 @16bit_kaspa Unfortunately this isn’t shown on the BSV blockchain explorer. I will have to take your word for it. Still, the BSV blockchain explorer shows the highest TPS number the BSV blockchain has ever achieved was 1350 TPS.

@WilliamShortss @16bit_kaspa During the Teranode tests, they used a cluster on Amazon Web Services. In May 2024, a six-node AWS setup averaged about one million transactions per second. Other tests even claimed up to three million TPS in a single day.

@JuicyTbone369 @16bit_kaspa The highest TPS number the BSV blockchain has ever achieved was 1350TPS. This was done during a stress test. Whatsonchain.com for info

@16bit_kaspa Brother, you really have no idea what you’re talking about. It was nice talking, but I don’t have time for this anymore. Best of luck

@BSVCasey @bsvsimp Looking at whatsonchain.com, all these have produced huge transaction volumes in the past. Not a single transaction from any of them today though.

@BSVCasey @bsvsimp Phew. I thought they had disappeared like Twetch Rekord IoT Bitails STUK My2cents TimeSeal Certihash MintBlue Weatherchain TonicPow Rekord Kloud CryptoFights Haste Peergame TimeOFTx Centbee All of these have made massive TX numbers before, disappeared or don’t generate today.

A wild OP_RETURN appears! 😊

@MateusLopes @OrangeBumPill @marc02200 If you are looking for cheap transactions, Nano doesn’t charge transaction fees. BSV is very expensive in comparison. Personally I’m only interested in Bitcoin because it can’t be confiscated from me if I hold it myself. Sovereign citizen. Unfortunately BSV can be confiscated

@MateusLopes @OrangeBumPill @marc02200 Please remember, those transactions might be quick but that doesn’t necessarily mean they are considered safe. BSV transactions require many more confirmations than both BitcoinCash and Bitcoin before they are considered safe. These confirmations take time.

@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.

Really? So, run your full node and disagree with miners to see what happens? hahahah.... This is the fantasy you called on the other message bro. Bitcoin was created as a system that do not need trust, miners already did the work of nodes. Nodes just watch and cry if they decide not agreeing. I hope BTC raise its blocks a little bit, and at least, make people spend some sats on a little more hard disks, instead of sitting in their sats and do nothing. BTC is so hard money that nobody can use a little bit to create more economical activity. Non sense!

@vellegno @paolo_aga The upcoming BSV hard fork does include a rules change. The protocol is not the same. The release notes literally says it includes changes to the protocol rules. Please note, this update is not reinstating the original Bitcoin protocol difficulty adjustment.

@WilliamShortss @paolo_aga Segwit didn’t require a hard fork, yet it changed the chain of digital signatures. If you want to run 1.1.0 and fork off you’re just dumb, as protocol is the same but adding calculations that are not compatible with the older version. Not every hard fork is a rules change.

BTC and BSV exist for people addicted to dogma and trapped in cognitive dissonance. Both drifted away from the white paper. Their narrative is built because they fear BCH and decentralization. BCH 💚 is Bitcoin. It works, it ends their narrative, and therefore they panic.

@vellegno @paolo_aga But it’s not the same lol. If it was the same current BSV nodes wouldn’t be out of consensus if the design was the same. The BSV protocol is changing. The rules are changing. Tx order might not be changing but other rules are changing.

@WilliamShortss @paolo_aga Design is the same, it’s not changing tx ordering or introducing unrelated software that cripples digital signatures.

@vellegno @paolo_aga But anyone that runs the BSV protocol today, running the core rules to the current BSV protocol, will be out of consensus if they don’t run the new core rules (BSV protocol) after the upcoming BSV hard fork. Protocol changes change the core rules.

@WilliamShortss @paolo_aga Core rules are set in stone, same as version 0.1, no deviation from the whitepaper You can’t pretend you restore the original functionalities that Core has discarded over the years without a hard fork Laughable take

@vellegno @paolo_aga “Forcing the whole ecosystem to upgrade.” lol. “BSV is set in stone” ha ha

@vellegno @paolo_aga Please note, this update is a hard fork and includes changes to the BSV protocol.