Subnostr

If they stick to backwards compatibility, it won’t happen.

If some devs break backwards compatibility, and convince some miners to follow them, it’ll be them forking Bitcoin, not me.

And there’s no upside to do so. Look at all the previous forks.

Laeserin 1y ago

Previous forks all tried to change the functionality, as far as I know.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Finrod Felagund 1y ago

True, and they all failed.

Laeserin 1y ago

My point.

Low Information Voter 1y ago

(Devil's Advocate here, but #monero is very much alive and has "real economy" adoption to rival bitcoin. Just not in things that can have main street shop fronts. It sucks as a SoV, though, because inflation-by-design.)

BottleTeams 1y ago

Money is a *brand* first and foremost. You want the brand most people recognize. The Yen, Euro, Aussie all have brands and have plenty of adoption. The dollar is a brand that is the largest, so everyone wants dollars.

Bitcoin is THE brand.

Low Information Voter 1y ago

Truth

Laeserin 1y ago

Yes, that's my argument. You can burn a brand.

Finrod Felagund 1y ago

True, but there’s no benefit to burn an established brand and start a whole new one from scratch.

It is technically possible, but I can’t imagine anyone would do this.

Laeserin 1y ago

That all depends upon what happens with Bitcoin going forward.

Finrod Felagund 1y ago

Stakes are getting higher day after day, so it makes most sense to ossify Bitcoin.

Tinkering days are gone. We have nostr for that.

shortwavesurfer2009 1y ago

the usd is a brand and is actively being burned.

21seasons 1y ago

If you don't change the functionality, then you just create a new client which is compatible with the existing network, like Bitcoin Knots for example.

Laeserin 1y ago

I mean, that you don't change the way it works, but you recreate the same thing again, with some slight alteration, to make it incompatible with the old one.

Finrod Felagund 1y ago

In such case, it’s not the same thing anymore.