What would you say is the end vision for Monero? Does it aim to survive as a parallel system, letting fiat to normies?
We often hear that money converges to one, so I imagine a lot of Bitcoiners expect Bitcoin to become the global money for all individuals and eventually nations, which is either naive in many respects or a very very long term thing.
Would XMR aim at such a thing as well or does it recognize it as something undesirable?
I do think that convergence at one is a metaphysical principle that oy applies to our timeless and spaceless "reality".
The matrix (matter) manifests itself through polarity which is often described as a yin and yang. One and the other at the same time, dancing and competing for the present moment.
I do think that Bitcoin and Monero present a yin-yang relationship of sorts.
I do not believe in one ring, one money, one A-eye to rule them all. I believe in nature that has built in competition and synergy at the core. It comes with kill switches (Achilles) to exit the form and start anew.
Bitcoin and Monero are just temporary fads. Just like everything impermanent.
Monero doesn't need to be the one coin for everybody to succeed. If all conscious people use Monero where they see it as an increase in their natural rights to expressing one self it already won.
Parallel systems can be encouraged but ultimately they'll only fall into place once the market demands them.
In that sense we (Bitcoiners incl. Monero) are early resonators with a future to come
For now Monero is the antagonist to the satanic agenda. Rapid development needs competent dancers. But at one point (like anything in the matrix) it may fail its own aspirations. It's time to know when to leave this plane as a living being just as at the times you'll need to leave systems that served one before.
gosh if there was one coherent vision on the subject everything would be so much simpler wouldn't it?
It would, yet not sure it's possible, after all such is the nature of decentralized systems.
What I don't understand from the Monero people is their motivation for considering Bitcoin compromised / almost failing.
It seems to me that Bitcoin can, from a technical perspective, still be used in ways which adhere to the original cypherpunk ethos:
- you can buy it staying away from KYC
- you can do coinjoins
- you can open LN channels, close them when done, and shuffle things around some more with further coinjoins if you like
Mining is however very much centralized though. That's the weakest structural point of the Bitcoin edifice.
But the main point remains: is Bitcoin compromised, or is it simply that the masses that have been exposed to don't see the problem it's trying to solve in the first place and end up wrapping it in institutional paper games? Are we dealing with an inevitable cultural problem that other projects would also have to be confronted with the moment they become "popular", or is there something else going on, such as a long term state level attack?
"compromised" is a matter of perspective
the *trajectory* is wrong if the end goal is permissionless freedom money.
there is both an inevitable cultural problem AND a state level regulatory attack, that Bitcoiners vastly underestimate.
The regulatory capture playbook is well-understood.
But there are no substantial voices in Bitcoin talking about it.
and sure, it's technically possible to use Bitcoin privately right now. but everyone is hoping to get legal permission to continue using it privately,
rather than make it impossible to prevent using it privately.
which is where Monero diverges in philosophy.
