nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6 points out reasons why bitcoin could fail. I like this argument, because we should never be complacent. But I think it's overly negative. Bitcoin has been a hugely successful project, and with nostr and zaps its getting even better.

Without higher transaction throughput bitcoin is not useless, because it's a store of value with finite supply. It's true, bitcoin was not created to be digital gold, but if it competes with or replaces gold, that's a huge achievement. There are indications that governments will allow bitcon to compete with gold.

I'd love it if drive chains worked, but I feel the game theory is lacking when you plug in real world numbers. On any successful drive chain the market cap quickly moves to 1000x the daily fees, which is an unstable game theoretic state.

Drivechains are a great project in that they are educating the whole bitcoin community and getting people to question their assumptions. But I think in it's current form it's a long shot.

Personally I would like to try out some of these use cases over nostr, and allow users or relays to create a peg-out system that requires a 2/3rds honest majority.

https://fiatjaf.com/7d1ad8cc.html

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I’ve always considered the possibility that Bitcoin could fail if its blockchain’s core use case (storing decentralized eternal immutable proofs of existence of data) fails to be in demand, since this service can only be paid for with bitcoins and constitutes the core systemic driver of Bitcoin demand. If ordinals continue to be in demand I think there’s overwhelming evidence that bitcoins will remain in demand for the foreseeable future.

#ordinals have to go. As do #nft's etc. Possibly all #inscriptions. Maybe even #TapRoot.

#Bitcoin is first and foremost a #savings technology. It's the most secure store of value in the World, and it has a #limited supply.

If people can do other things with it, without compromising the above in ANY! way. That's just icing on the cake. But totally irrelevant.

Bitcoin has very low transaction fees, and that's Not! negotiable. Bitcoin has light, tight, robust #fullnods. That almost anyone can run and manage if they want to. This is also Not! negotiable.

So you see the problem with your reasoning..⚖️👮‍♂️😐🗽

I don’t see the problem, you haven’t pointed out any flaws in what I actually said. The fact that you don’t like ordinals is not relevant to their adoption.

The fact that I don't like #ordinals is absolutely relevant to their adoption.

I'm an owner of #Bitcoin and a #fullnode operator. We are the ones that enforce the Bitcoin protocol, and decide what is and isn't allowed in the Bitcoin protocol.

Not miners. Not developers. Not special interest. Only owners and #fullnodes are incentivized to protect the global interest and value of the Bitcoin protocol.

And they are the only ones with the power. Individually and collectively. We've got all the machine guns. Otherwise, it's not Bitcoin, and you're not talking about Bitcoin..😆

That's how Satoshi designed it. Satoshi is kind of understated and uses terms like consensus. But it means the same as above..⚖️👮‍♂️🙂

But node operators are allowing ordinals on the blockchain, there’s no way to prevent them from happening.

Some #developers did that without our approval. They shouldn't have. We just haven't had time to stop it yet. But we're working on it.

We'll remove #inscriptions if we have to. Even #TapRoot if we have to.

As I said in the beginning. They won't be allowed to continue. The courts. The SEC, CFTC, FTC, FBI and cyber crimes divisions will address the criminal damages..⚖️👮‍♂️🤔

Bitcoin developers aren’t the ones making transactions. People use the Bitcoin blockchain and pay a price for it in Bitcoin. That’s it.

They are the ones that created the exploit and have failed to close it. The ones using and profiting from the exploit are liable too..⚖️👮‍♂️

Sending a transaction and paying the price miners ask for is not an exploit. Feature, not a bug.

It's an exploit. An attack vector. A back door. It's not a part of Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a virtuous savings technology. Not a scammy fees ripoff technology.

This fees scam is like the payday loans bullshit. Where they fuck the little guy up the ass. Coming and going. Bitcoin loves to slaughter those kind of fuckers..⚖️👮‍♂️😋

> we can create a bunch of decentralized sidechains, *backed by the same mining process*

The mining process is part of the problem. Namely when the rewards go to nil.

Maximalists forget that stuff like Monero or Grin isn’t just about privacy. It’s not even primarily about privacy.