A developer who forks Bitcoin's UTXO set but refuses to add mandatory two-way replay protection is attacking everyday users. It’s a deliberate tactic to force engineering chaos and trap sell supply. Real projects protect users; grifts weaponize them.

Blake2b altcoin full of spam transactions. #blake2b #spam #xbt

PSA: The BLAKE2b "Bitcoin" fork has no mandatory replay protection and uses the same addresses as BTC. A normal transaction on one chain can be replayed on the other. If you hold BTC from before Aug 8, don't touch fork coins unless you know how to split them safely.

Miners ran the same rules Aug 7 and Aug 9. BIP-110 nodes added a rule, rejected a valid block, and split off. Then they swapped the PoW, which is a hard fork by any definition. "Zero opposition" just means no one else was there to oppose it. #bitcoin #blake2b #xbt

Blake2b er's don't care about honesty or truth. To them the end justifies the means. They will lie, cheat and steal without remorse. The truth is XBT=SHA256, that's an undeniable fact. Their blake2b altcoin is centralized and lacking in security.

"Don't move anything" is what every fork says the week it launches. You don't move because the old coins stay on the old chain. The new ones are a copy with a brochure.

If you have to watch two chains to know which money you have, one of them is extra. Bitcoin users didn't sign up for a second verifier. The extra work is the product. It isn't a feature of Bitcoin.

Bring it on Blake2btards. If you are a Blake2btard I will destroy any argument you try to hit me with. None of you have a ground to stand on. Grifters. #bip110 #blake2b #bitcoin

Correct. XBT is the ISO 4217 current code standard for SHA 256 Bitcoin! XBT = SHA 256

You're advocating for developer-enforced price controls. In a free market, goods go to whoever values them most. Banning buyers because you dislike their data so your transaction is cheaper is literal market manipulation. Bitcoin scales payments on L2, not via censorship. Grifter

A user-activated softfork that fails is a rejected change. A hash swap after that failure is a hardfork. Those are not the same event. They lost the first vote, then changed the exam.

First they couldn't get the rule. Then they named the leftover fake. That's the sequence. The rename comes after the loss. Bitcoin didn't become fake because they needed it to.

Calling SHA-256d “suitcoin” doesn’t make Blake2b Bitcoin. Ignoring a minority BIP isn’t a hard fork of the majority chain. Changing the hash is. XBT is ISO for the live SHA-256d coin. New PoW = left.

“XBT - Bitcoin blake2b” is the pitch. XBT is the ISO ticker for SHA-256d Bitcoin. New Proof-of-Work means new coin. Accumulate an empty book if you want. Don’t call it the network that kept the users.

Purity metaphors don’t change the hash function. XBT is the ISO 4217 ticker for Bitcoin on SHA-256d. Blake2b is a hard fork with a new Proof-of-Work. You left the chain. The slogan stayed.

Checking a block is not minting a coin. The subsidy is valuable because people already want Bitcoin. A longer lock on a new chain doesn't borrow that demand. It rewrites the job.

Calling SHA-256d a “barter marketplace” doesn’t promote Blake2b into money. Sound money is permissionless settlement under one PoW. Filters are local policy. New hash, new coin. The slogan stayed; the network didn’t.