15 years after being cited in the Bitcoin whitepaper, you call Adam Back a “Bitcoin opportunist”
LMAO
Discussion
Do you think that the man who cited in the #Bitcoin white paper is just noble?
If the man is not an opportunist, why did the man launch a back-doored shitcoin?
nostr:note1u25r5kvmxtcn30cjjuek4dfaajvws36jd2n80w8p8mdpmcw3dlqssgtnu2
Liquid is a transparent and federated sidechain. Adam Back cannot singlehandedly rugpull Liquid on a whim.
There are risk-reward tradeoffs with using Liquid. They’re completely transparent so I analyzed them and chose not to use Liquid.
Are all Bitcoin-related companies opportunistic? If yes, then agree to disagree. If no, then I’m curious what the difference is to you.
That transparency is meaningless. Think about why the block size is not large, why we have to run our own nodes, why distributed ledgers are important.
Adam Back planted a backdoor and it reminds me Eth and the DAO. It doesn't really matter who will open the backdoor. There exists rug, it will be pulled.
That trade-off is unacceptable. It will repeat the history of gold. If you consider EO6102, I believe you can agree with me.
Of course, not every Bitcoin companies are opportunistic. For me, "freedom" is the key.
Also, not every opportunists are bad guys. I don't think Michael Saylor is malicious, I think he just wants to get rich and be a successful businessman. At the same time, I don't think he is good for Bitcoin and freedom. (I think that the others who I mentioned are bad for Bitcoin and freedom, though)
Who uses liquid though? Literally nobody