pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 99 replies \ @justin_shocknet 8 Dec \ on: Covenant support comparison by Vortex bitcoin
Quite the selection bias of scammers, salaried spooks, and naive shell devs.
Funny that 2 legit developers on the list offer tepid acceptance due to low fork risk for the "weak" options.... this list is backfiring beautifully for the Etheriumification camp.
as usual justin the spammer comes to say hi, and as usual his post has 0 sats
reply
No ones buying your shitfork bro #814976
reply
The covenants discussion continues to heat up and make progress and that's what matters as covenants will come to bitcoin some day in some way or another, despite clueless non-dev clowns like yourself who literally aren't even capable of understanding the op code BIPs but still deciding to spam fud and nonsense everywhere.
reply
non-dev
lol
clowns
D-tier techno-illiterate influencers like you and Shinobi are really heating it up... oh and Ark scammers
Enjoy your shitfork and keep on virtue signaling, you're doing great
reply
keep not reading the BIPs and contributing zero technical argument against them, you're doing great...
reply
I explain things for "the average person" you're shitfork claims to help
Why don't you learn to code and implement them instead of crying?
reply
explain things? LOL never saw a single technical argument from you yet
I am a dev and all of LNhance's op codes are being tested on testnet right now and we should have an activation client out next year
maybe actually pay attention to what you're criticizing?
reply
I've explained here why claims of scaling self-custody can only be made by scammers and retards: #814976
maybe actually pay attention to what you're criticizing?
Sounds like an awful waste of time
So you don't even have code for your shitfork? how do you expect people to run it if they can't download it? Maybe spend less time crying and making spreadsheets and get to work