Thread

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.
image image image
ck's avatar ck
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?
View quoted note →

Replies (2)

↩ replying to jgbtc
I was surprised to see it. In the same negative way I was surprised about Adam Back and Andreas. Or the level of retardation majority of Coretards devs have fallen. That would be expected behavior from Shinobi, shitcoinmagazine and all who gravitate around it, David Bailey, Jameson Slopp and other bad actors like them. But slowly I am starting to expect everything and not get that surprised. Corruption unveils the worst from people. We just need to resist the bad actors and fight for the good causes - fix the money, fix the world.