Thread - Hyper

ck 🛡️ 3 months ago

Let’s do a quick thought experiment. Imagine a government becomes opposed to how certain people are using Bitcoin. In response, it establishes its own Bitcoin node software, launches a mining pool, and introduces a soft fork—claiming that anyone who resists this fork is supporting illegal activity. Would you support this soft fork?

Replies (15)

BTCGVA 🛡️ 3 months ago

Then they wouldn't understand the basics of bitcoin, a peer to peer electronic cash system. PEER TO PEER No government No bank No central authority They cannot declare something illegal that they have no access to. Now, go to your favourite coffeeshop and talk them into accepting bitcoin. 🟠

BTCGVA 🛡️ 3 months ago

↩ replying to BTCGVA

If the coffeeshop needs an easy way to accept bitcoin:

🇨🇭 Swiss Bitcoin Pay

Accept Bitcoin in your Business. The simple way. Worldwide. Free to start. No hardware. Non-custodial.

Toxic Bitcoiner 🛡️ 3 months ago

What would you do with your node if even one CP gets into opreturn? This is a sincere question.

Vector5 3 months ago

Does the new node software change the fundamental use case of Bitcoin?

ihsotas 3 months ago

↩ replying to Vector5

Inherently.

ihsotas 3 months ago

Nope. I would imagine any such shitcoiners would be rejected by the main economic actors since violating the fundamental usecase of bitcoin makes the network worthless.

The Daniel 🖖 🛡️ 3 months ago

What if it’s only “temporary,” though…? 😬

bitcoinpoorguy 比特幣傢伙 🇭🇰 🛡️ 3 months ago

↩ replying to The Daniel 🖖

When govt says “temporary” 🫣

BitcoinIsFuture 3 months ago

Let’s do a quick thought experiment. Imagine a government wants to attack Bitcoin. What could they do? They can compromised a number of developers. The developers could start slowly degrading Bitcoin. They could change the definition of Bitcoin being "digital currency that uses peer-to-peer technology" to just be a "peer-to-peer network". They could change the definition of the datacarriersize. Using that as argument they could deny fixing the inscriptions spam. Then they could use the inscriptions spam as an argument that spam is unstoppable so they better blow up OP_RETURN and invite even more spam. Just like BSV did after which someone uploaded CSAM to the BSV blockchain.