What are your thoughts on Bitcoin's UASF?

Who's that Ching Chong Cutie?
Sauce?

>>2211607
This my dong is rock hard

>>2211607
Talk about the user activated soft fork and I will give you.

>>2211572
NOBODY HERE EVEN KNOWS WHAT USAF IS BIZ DOESN'T KNOW SHIT ABOUT CRYPTOCURRENCY.

File: 1480674459721.jpg (66KB, 1024x945px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 1024x945px

>>2211572
If activated BUY BUY BUY.

>>2211835
implemented

>>2211572

I have a hunch they'll be the ones that'll slowly kill bitcoin.

>>2211572
It's pathetic last-ditch attempt at forcing the 'settlement layer' vision (as opposed to p2p cash) and isn't going to work.
First it's not 'user'. Users' nodes don't matter. Only big entities matter - exchanges and shops. Exchanges are likely to list both chains, so it's a wash. Bitpay and purse.io aren't supporting uasf, so it's dead in the water.

It's not a soft fork. A soft fork is when old nodes stay on the 'correct' chain - which means having the majority of mining power is a vital requirement. UASF drops it, making it a hard fork in reality.

A more appropriate acronym would be CAHF - Corporate Activated Hard Fork - with 'corporate' meaning exchanges/shops/etc.

Almost certainly nothing comes out of uasf, I doubt even bitfury is going to mine a minority chain.

>>2211572
both sides seem fucking retarded on social media so without reading anything fuck both of them

I think the air force is pretty nice desu

satoshi nakamoto needs to come back