Replying to Avatar Laeserin

I think we'll have CBDCs before the Bitcoin Standard. There doesn't seem to be sufficient momentum against them.

Kick that can, once more.
61
woolcycle 1y ago

What I don't get is the restrictive focus on #Bitcoin, rather than using whatever it takes to build the financial freedom tech stack. To an extent, is it not just a question of various pieces of code, which are either performant or they are not?

What I heard from nostr:npub1kuy0wwf0tzzqvgfv8zpw0vaupkds3430jhapwrgfjyn7ecnhpe0qj9kdj8 is that some hardcore Bitcoiners are discussing Bitcoin integration with L1s, but that these conversations tend to take place in private. And I can well understand why that would be, given the reaction any time I have the temerity to speak out against the group think!

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
David King 1y ago

i’m talking application layer stuff to be clear. just trying to build functionality that bitcoin doesn’t support

61
woolcycle 1y ago

Thanks for engaging, and my apologies if I misrepresented something you said earlier. "...functionality that bitcoin doesn’t support" is clear to me. That is part the appeal of an additional L1, that it could present the Bitcoin ecosystem with fait accompli in terms of additional functionality, and thus speed up the developmental process, time being of the essence, as nostr:npub1m4ny6hjqzepn4rxknuq94c2gpqzr29ufkkw7ttcxyak7v43n6vvsajc2jl describes.

Is there some resource I can look at to get clear in my head the distinction between "application layer" and the rest? At the end of the day, for me, it comes down to code and functionality, I'm agnostic as to the layer or avenue through which it arrives!

Avatar
David King 1y ago

https://x.com/marediashehzan/status/1803048004041019603

61
woolcycle 1y ago

Thanks, but that suggests that it isn't a case of "don't fix it if it ain't broke", and the search is still on for a solution.