Hacker News Reader

Comment by phaser | Hacker News Reader

Please note this is hosted on the BitcoinSV (BSV) network, which is not the same as the Bitcoin network that we all know as BTC.

BitcoinSV has much bigger blocks than Bitcoin, which is probably why this idea is possible.

While the same idea could be applied for the original Bitcoin network, that is far more popular, it would be highly impractical as blocks are smaller and transaction costs are higher.

I don't want to start another big/small blocks debate but if this idea gets popular, I doubt there will be many nodes that want to host the insane amount of data that will be accumulated, and the incentives for hosting a full node cost-effectively is the main reason why Bitcoin blocks are small.

I also sense a malicious intention with the website not making any reference to the fact that this is not the BTC network that 99.9% of visitors associate with the word Bitcoin.

View on HN

This post is running around BSV-associated social media outlets. [1] [2]

BSV is a project almost entirely propped up by a billionaire gambling tycoon named Calvin Ayre who is promoting a known con-artist named Craig Wright [3] as the inventor of Bitcoin. They promote BitcoinSV, which came into existence last November as the "One True Bitcoin". They are invested in massive astro-turfing for publicity and to lend themselves perceived legitimacy.

[1] https://twitter.com/_unwriter/status/1143599992667590656

[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoincashSV/comments/c5eg27/its_t...

[3] https://craigwright.online/

the twitter you link is the developer

I don't care if you fork Bitcoin. It's open source, fork away!

But don't masquerade as Bitcoin and intentionally confuse people. That's not cool.

And if you build new things on top of this foundation, and you also intentionally conflate the names with an intent to deceive people, then you certainly don't have my best interests in mind.

I'll stay far away from this project.

It is BitCoin. Same address space, same hashing algorithm, same consensus rules.

BTC is just one version of the BitCoin experiment.

I guess the word "Bitcoin" used here refers to the protocol that the browser builds on, and not the chain commonly known as Bitcoin which has BTC as base asset. Bottle is not limited to BSV but could as well be run on other chains implementing the Bitcoin core protocol such as BTC, BCH, LTC and Doge.

You are correct but it actually could not be run on BTC or BCH because of changes that were made to them that make them incompatible with the design laid out in the protocol whitepaper. It also would be prohibitively expensive to do so due to the block size limitations they have in place.

In theory it could work on BTC or BCH. Bottle relies on large OP_RETURN which is a miner-adjustable limit, not consensus. But in practice you (1) would need to find a miner to do this. (2) could only put in 1MB of data on BTC. (3) would have to pay a lot of satoshis (as you pointed out).

Yes and also, BTC and BCH don't have a "Stable Protocol" Mindset, OnChain Developer Apps will get Their Apps and Tools fked up every time the Core Protocol Changes.

Aside from the lack of infrastructure, in BTC they already abandon the miner, The money that should be Goes to Miner for securing the chain, it goes to the Lightning Network Node.

When block reward diminished it'll fked up, they cannot survive with such low income from LN.

I'm reminded of a question Peter Thiel asks founders: What is one thing you believe that nearly everybody else disagrees with you on? Having a good answer means you might be onto something big. Everyone building on BSV has a pretty good answer right now.

But there is no good answer while everyone disagrees with you

I guess that's true if you think good == popular, but I don't.

Totally!

BSV is the pure capitalist, maximalist version of the BitCoin experiment. If they're correct and it works, things are going to get very interesting soon.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com