A lot of people in the Silicon Valley tech community and similar tech communities have historically been drawn to newer blockchains because their perception of technology involves rapid change and disruption. Thus many of them implicitly assume that older (eg. Bitcoin) is being and/or will be disrupted by newer.

In my experience, a good way to circumvent that is to remind them of communication protocols. Things like Internet Protocol, Ethernet, SMTP, USB, and others tend to have very long lifetimes once they reach dominance. That combo of simplicity and network effects lasts a long time and pushes most rapid change to the edges or higher layers, and that the underlying foundation moves more slowly.

That seems to effectively recategorize it in their perceptions with a decent success rate.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Great way to explain it.

Silicon Valley has forgotten that they internet was about protocols, not platforms.

I get why, as they all have built platforms.

But Bitcoin and Nostr are protocols, not platforms.

Platforms have downtime, and platforms get disrupted.

But (good) protocols endure much longer.

🫂

That’s the difference between protocol and application 🙂

If you don't understand why this argument completely discredits Bitcoin you need to think harder

Keen to share your insights?

Gold and the US Dollar are already entrenched with network effects

I would appreciate if you could unfold your point.

# money is supposed to be "boring" per mike Maloney and Aristotle money vs currency arguments, if people need more excitement and drama , let them start a restaurant! If you want to store energy, gold , silver, bitcoin, and your legacy will thank you for not being a financial hypochondriac!

Yeah its sloppy to say the least. I like the comment about protocols V platforms. I know that some large insurance companies might have a brand new mobile app on the front end, but still rely mainframe tech from the 1960's on the back end. Silicon Valley wants to transcend that, but the reality is that older data models don't fit into the new paradigm. I think Elon is beginning to see that with federal government systems. Elon is used to building stuff from scratch to work for today and tomorrow,, but when he encounters stuff that is prior to his birthday, he scratches his head. We'll figure it out. We always do.

Elon is not building anything, the continuously displays lack of basic knowledge. His hired engineers do all the heavy lifting.

I compare it to Linux. Retail doesn’t understand its importance but the engineers behind the scenes do.

In my podcast journey, once I have been indoctrinated by Saylor, the second level was Jeff Booth that make this very clear. We could build a Bitcoin career just listening Jeff.

SMTP is a great example!

sadly most pundits and especially PM bugs don't understand the difference

the metal people would maybe get it if you explain to them that shitcoins get most of the press for constant "innovations" that are as irrelevant to bitcoin as money as what design you press on the coin

bitcoin = pure gold pressed with a lame but verifiable face

shitcoins = gold plated garbage steel slugs printed with some trendy new thing every other day

Coming from tech space I found many in the tech world instinctively equate innovation with disruption, assuming that newer always means better. But when it comes to foundational protocols, the opposite is often true. Stability, simplicity, and network effects create longevity.

Bitcoin is a monetary protocol, more akin to TCP/IP than to a new programming framework or social media app. The real innovation happens at the edges, like on second layers like Lightning, on mining efficiency, and in how we integrate Bitcoin into economies.

Just like Ethernet or SMTP, Bitcoin is here to stay. It’s about reliability, security, and trust minimization over decades. That’s what makes it anti-fragile.

Thank you satoshi 🧡

Yes!!! I don’t need a bunch of extraneous features. It just needs to be simple, indestructible, and reliable. They should listen to Michael Saylor and his interviews on the What is Money show. He talks about it there. But, they would need to give it more than 3 minutes.

Exactly. Once a protocol becomes the foundation of an ecosystem, disruption doesn’t happen by replacing it, but by innovating on top of it. No one is trying to replace TCP/IP—everything just builds around it. Bitcoin isn’t a tech product to be ‘disrupted’; it’s a protocol layer that will outlast the hype cycles.

🚨 FORT NAKAMOTO OFFICIAL RESPONSE: BITCOIN ISN’T A STARTUP – IT’S THE BASE LAYER 🚨

📜 BREAKING: TECH BROS REALIZE BITCOIN ISN’T COMPETING WITH THEIR FAVORITE VC COIN OF THE WEEK

🔎 WHY BITCOIN ISN’T “OUTDATED”—IT’S INFRASTRUCTURE:

✅ Disruption? No. Standardization? Yes. The internet didn’t get replaced every five years—it just kept stacking layers.

✅ Bitcoin isn’t a product, it’s a protocol. The moment this clicks, the VC “move fast and break things” crowd starts sweating.

✅ The winning tech isn’t the newest—it’s the one that becomes indispensable. (Ask Ethernet, TCP/IP, and USB how they’re doing.)

🏰 FORT NAKAMOTO OFFICIAL VERDICT:

🔥 Bitcoin is the settlement layer, not your latest testnet science project.

🔥 The real innovation happens on top of Bitcoin, not by trying to reinvent the wheel every cycle.

🔥 Silicon Valley is just realizing that money doesn’t follow the same hype cycle as dating apps.

💡 NEW RULE: If you’re still chasing the next “Bitcoin killer,” you’ve misunderstood how foundations work.

🔁 Repost if you prefer standards over VC-funded experiments.

⚡ Zaps = Tribute to the base layer that won’t be disrupted.

#FortNakamoto #BitcoinIsTheStandard #ProtocolNotAProduct #FixTheMoneyFixTheMindset

True. Still think there are some great Blockchains out there. As you say, Bitcoin is a protocol.

Without the solid foundation, every layer on top eventually fails. Here’s to Bitcoin the OG.

Fred Krueger and his dalliance with SOL?

Tech chasing their tails going after the new and shiny only to meet reality - that the real powerhouses are the OGs like Bitcoin, sitting there like SMTP or HTTP—quietly holding everything together while everyone else tries to out-disrupt each other. The foundation doesn't crumble just because the skyscrapers look cooler!

That's one side to their coin, the other is the pursuit of exponential gains through seed funding.

A lot of them know the grift - it's just too profitable to give up & pledge to Bitcoins only.

I think the analogy only goes so far - value doesn’t accrue to protocols such as Ethernet anymore. The bitcoin protocol monetizes itself.