Thread

Alert: butthurt FED on the horizon

The best argument coretards can come up with is to accuse people of being AI generated...

By choice?

Sure sure this one liner dispels all suspicion 🙄 nice job case closed

As usual everything that Jameson lopp says appears to be some kinda projection

What happened to #ThereAreNoCoincidences 😂😂😂

You're racist for even hinting at this! Relax, its not like she turned down a job at Google right out of college to go yolo into "working on bitcoin" with no plan. Luckily she immediately became the first "fellow" at a bitcoin nonprofit that is funded by a Davos/Wef/Aspen Institute fellow. Its nothing. Stop looking!

The more I think about it, the dumber I feel for thinking the attacks on bitcoin would come from outside. Trojan horse from within is the easiest way but takes a bit more patience (incrementalism is THE tried and true tactic)

Its fashionable to dump on governments, but the modern nation state is the result of at least 500 years of intense competition that included the development of spy craft and central banks. They have different priorities than us little citizens, and they excel at the things they prioritize.

To think the "escape routes" from their system won't be under full attack is naivety Insert 'eye of sauron' gif

By incrementalism, do you mean the growing computer power to break, alter, rewrite (in one's favour),... the history of the Bitcoin ledger. I remember Guy Swann (Bitcoin Audible Podcast: "The guy who has read more on Bitcoin than...) or Jack Spirko (the of ~16-year running Survival Podcast, and recent Bitcoin Breakout podcast) Supposedly what quantum computing is all about or will do??? If you would ever have the patience to expand on the trojan horse scenario, i at least would be interested in hearing.

What i forgot to add... What is the essence of it--the from inside problem. So as to crack the code, or pattern language (a la Christopher Alexander and the rest of the clan who penned A Pattern Language and the rest in this triad, trio of books), of the interior (NOT exterior) attack vector.

No, not talking about quantum at all. Just the human aspect of who are the bitcoin Core Maintainers and who has commit permissions to the codebase

Sorry should have been more specific. First segwit, then taproot, and now op return limit (look at Matthews video on core's original sin for more context- mainly enabling inscriptions) Wonder what they'll come up with next.. The patterns are all I'm really looking at since I'm not well versed in code. Love both of Chistropher Alexander's books that I've read. I reference A Pattern Language when building often

Yea me too. I hoped he would get over this but unfortunately he's too far gone.

So you're advocating for allowing child porn on the blockchain or you're just one of those apathetic people that don't care either way and think pedophiles should have "freedom of speech to share whatever they want" ?

This is a classic example of a False Dilemma (also known as a False Dichotomy or an Either/Or Fallacy). This construction deliberately excludes any nuanced, moderate, or alternative viewpoints. For example, a person might argue for the principles of decentralization and free speech on the blockchain while also believing that illegal content should be addressed through other technological or legal means, without resorting to centralized censorship. The question doesn't allow for this complexity. It's a loaded question: Both options are designed to make me look bad, regardless of my answer. It's a rhetorical trap. If I deny the first, I am implicitly pushed toward the second, equally damnable, option. The goal is not to understand my actual position but to corner me into a morally indefensible corner. Good job.

first - "we" ??? what is this? you mindmelded with your wyfe or something? you speak as one!? lol... RED FLAG!!!!!!! wow... never heard - "im an ahistorical mcmerican consumer, johnny-come-lately, with an inability to think adversarially when i am up against a 5000-year old banking dynasty who has repeatedly destroyed opposition through various forms of sexualized blackmail up to and including CSAM." - it put quite that way. and it aint just the vile shit - its the BLOAT which will severely and negatively impact node decentralization and affordability... making it impossible for all those minorities you love more than your neighbors, in africa and indonesia, and increasingly most broke americans and destitute westerners, to run a node... and before you clonespeak, "prune' THIS! I dont get you jaw-agape complacent pacifists with your obliviously sunny takes - but I will not be surprised if you destroy bitcoin. you have destroyed everything else that made life tolerable with your kumbaya feminine disney outlook on world power dynamics and the absolutely RUTHLESS nature of the multi-front war. its YOUR world bro. look in the mirror - the rest of us are just living in the "its all gonna be fine" nightmare. glad I never got around to feeding your fucking stupid goats.

It seems like your argument relies more on personal attacks and mischaracterizations than on addressing the actual topic. Let's break down the logical fallacies you're using here: Ad Hominem (Personal Attacks): The majority of your reply is focused on attacking my character rather than my ideas. Phrases like "jaw-agape complacent pacifists," "kumbaya feminine disney outlook," and insults about my wife or "stupid goats" are all attempts to dismiss my argument by insulting me personally. Straw Man: You created a ridiculous quote—"im an ahistorical mcmerican consumer..."—and attributed it to me. I never said that. You're not arguing against my actual position; you're attacking a distorted, easy-to-defeat caricature that you invented. Hasty Generalization: You've leaped from a disagreement on this one topic to the conclusion that "you have destroyed everything else that made life tolerable." That's a massive, unsupported generalization. False Dilemma: You frame the situation as if there are only two options: my supposed "obliviously sunny" worldview or your "nightmare" reality. This ignores the possibility of any nuanced or complex perspective in between. If you'd like to discuss the actual issues—like node decentralization and data bloat—I'm happy to do that. But I'm not interested in engaging with personal insults and logical fallacies.

very well then - what was it that you found objectionable about kratter's video?