@thacypha is on PowPing!

PowPing is a place where you can earn Bitcoin simply by socializing, for FREE.
Never tried Bitcoin? It's OK! Just come, socialize, and earn Bitcoin.
Check out thacypha's activities
Total Economy: 0 USD
To be fair, 0-sat output is not the same as 0-sat UTXO. 0-sat output is included in the WP and refers to the data processing capabilities of the bitcoin network. 0-sat output basically just means data transmitted via the network that is not written into blocks because it doesn't hold any transaction info.
thacypha replied:
If it does not hold any transaction info and is not written into blocks that is not a BitCoin transaction. How are you meant to find it with SPV? Please show me where it is stated in the white paper about 0-sat! "2. Transactions We define an electronic coin as a chain of digital signatures. Each owner transfers the coin to the next by digitally signing a hash of the previous transaction and the public key of the next owner and adding these to the end of the coin. A payee can verify the signatures to verify the chain of ownership. The problem of course is the payee can't verify that one of the owners did not double-spend the coin. A common solution is to introduce a trusted central authority, or mint, that checks every transaction for double spending. After each transaction, the coin must be returned to the mint to issue a new coin, and only coins issued directly from the mint are trusted not to be double-spent. The problem with this solution is that the fate of the entire money system depends on the company running the mint, with every transaction having to go through them, just like a bank. We need a way for the payee to know that the previous owners did not sign any earlier transactions. For our purposes, the earliest transaction is the one that counts, so we don't care about later attempts to double-spend. The only way to confirm the absence of a transaction is to be aware of all transactions. In the mint based model, the mint was aware of all transactions and decided which arrived first. To accomplish this without a trusted party, transactions must be publicly announced [1], and we need a system for participants to agree on a single history of the order in which they were received. The payee needs proof that at the time of each transaction, the majority of nodes agreed it was the first received."
Half the young early upstarts in the BSV ecosystem, embraced by Bitcoin Association and others, who could have directed their energies to taking on Big Tech instead prefer to aim toward taking on CSW, Taal and users who supported some of them There is so many green fields and white space to do creative stuff and all they come up with is this BS. People should judge for themselves where those motivations came from
bpm replied:
…and act accordingly
What utter horse shit! 0 sat output wtf!