its not backwards compatible for those who do not move to the new signature scheme
Discussion
Backwards compatibility with regard to forks is taken from the perspective of a node operator rather than a transactor, but yes. Perhaps a new term is necessary.
> a new term is necessary
yes
Wait what? .. new term . ???
Like semiSoftHardFORK πππ
ah so that is the third software client software for bitcoin you're going for? hmm
all Saylor does is Saylor business
I am out.
How about connecting a working LN-address, which will enable sovereigns to zap you freedom money?
can i come up with it? Iβll do my best.
thanks
that's helpful
U-P-G-R-A-Y-E-D-D