Thread

Replies (33)

I had a conversation with, let’s call them β€œthe enemy” around 2020. Someone whose job it is to kill Bitcoin. He said, the single weakest link of Bitcoin are the Developers. They can change the code (granted, we were talking about scarcity). I laughed and said, luckily the nodes decide. They decide what they want to update and download and what not….turns out, the nodes are very passive, complacent and naiive. And frankly too few. So he was right, the CoreDevs and half of the key influencers were easy marks. Core may just have killed #bitcoin.
Hard choice because it’s become core vs knots but both sides behave badly and it’s hard to sort truth from lies. I look at it as core vs Bitcoin. Core appears to have been corrupted by shitcoiners led by Loop and other VC aligned sociopaths who care more about the cool new shit they can do with op-returns than they do about long term freedom for users.
vinney...axkl's avatar vinney...axkl
Depressingly classic duopoly shit. duopolies present a false dichotomy and generate polarization rage and suck up all the attention. of course there are always more than two options (an infinite number!), and the more the two try to tell you, "not only are there NOT more than two - but there's not even two! i'm the only solution!" the more the "lesser evil" fallacy shows itself. yes, schelling points are often useful - but they can easily mutate into a malicious antipattern when you mistake the "party" for the goal itself. you see this in political parties, you see it in culture wars and moral panics, you see it in Bitcoin right now. i'm not advocating for **A** Third Way in any of the above, but suggesting that you notice - in yourself - when your original abstract goals and ideals get quietly replaced with 'party-as-solution', whatever those goals may be; ethical governance, prosperity, social justice, individual freedom, neutral permisnionless electronic global money... i don't believe it is possible to "temporarily use a party to get towards your goal and then ditch it later" because they are darwinian organisms that are empowered exponentially by our energy. it only takes a few small injections of energy and attention to nearly permanently entrench the rot as an apex predator. (and you're the prey, obvs, silly) the only way to win is to not play > "Certainly the price for refusing [to play] is high, but that there is a price at all points to the fact that oppressors themselves acknowledge that even the weakest of their subjects must agree to be oppressed. If the subjects were unresisting puppets or automatons, no threat would be necessary, and no price would be paid thus" James Carse; _Finite and Infinite Games_ coordination problems coordination problems coordination problems coordination problems coordination problems
View quoted note →
This is fud. Citrea doesn’t need the changes offered by core 30…though the changes make it so citrea can do their thing in a less impactful to the chain way. People like to target Lopp for scant reasons but somehow ignore the fact that luke is a fucking statist christofascist
Blaming this on Lopp isn’t really fair. As I understand the transactions Citrea would use the expanded op_return limits for are rare. They don’t need it nor do I think they will even use it. And there’s no monetary need to blow the limit wide open. Literally nobody was asking for that