Fair. But let me give a contrarian utilitarian take: because every bit of energy that goes into Bitcoin strengthens it’s network effects, even these people should be encouraged to put in their energy to Bitcoin. Personally I want them to come last but still
Discussion
I get the principle but I disagree.
I still have fears for Bitcoin once eternal September sets in. I fear that once too many enter, the attacks will be irresistible and that the 21 M damn will irreversibly break.
How would the attacks break the 21m cap? Do you mean like paper Bitcoin?
no, socialism. Bitcoin would lose its name to a fork that the overwhelming majority would use to transact.
They would say : look we need more subsidy to "grease" the economy. And the retards would believe them. And then all that economic power would shift to a fork where that's the case. We would be stuck with "bitcoin classic" or something.
So youre worried that the world can agree to a new fork of Bitcoin without any nations or other actors cheating?
Yeah, if there is one rising hegemon in the world, the incentives align to use his rules to get ahead. Cheating only pays when the hegemon is in decline.
A rising hegemon would get ahead himslef by dictating the use of a fork in which subsidy is increased. One excuse for such a thing would be "it's unfair that the maxis got so much of the network without contributing much". Doing so would end up setting back the true chains for decades.
For now we are in a declining hegemonic system and the hegemon is trying to keep control. Smaller parties are incentivized to cheat. Won't be the case for long.