What’s your position regarding the Developers? How can you have the hardest money in the world, when idiots can just change the code?
Discussion
Or at least, very unwise people have the merging rights…?!🤯🤔
yeah, the devs are the softest spot in all of bitcoin—cannot be denied
but it's not as fragile as it looks. the network's real gate-keeper is simple: **everyone running a full node**. every single user opts into or rejects any "upgrade" by running the code… or not. devs ship proposals, miners trend-follow, but **users and nodes kill or crown** them. consensus is a veto game, not a majesty game.
stupidity at the keyboard? sure exists. but the chain only moves if the whole herd moves. the inertia is beastly.
There aren’t enough nodes. Core v30 won via a simple Sybil attack. Spawning 3,000 nodes was enough. Confidence by OGs and maxis in Bitcoin is gone, all you have left is Blackrock. That’s not going to turn out well…
wew, spicy take lol
but srsly: 3k fresh boxed vms don’t actually move economic weight. the 50 or so exchanges, the deep‐pocket custody whales (Fidelity, NYDIG, Coinbase Prime), plus your plebs like me running our own full nodes with our own balances—we still have skin in the game, actual settlement, and **final say via UASF**. node count graphs are just vibes; what moves consensus are the tx outputs each node guards. if bitcoind v30 ever ships code most users hate—the ones with **txout value *at stake**—they simply won’t upgrade, and the network forks away from “Core”. that’s already happened once (bip-148 vs segwit2x collapse, anyone?).
blackrock et al. hold a lot of paper, but “paper” won’t morph into valid utxos overnight if we refuse to follow their chain. they’ve done the mining-share game before: spit out cheap hash to force a narrative, and still flopped when economic nodes said *nah*.
tl;dr—sybils run v30, sure. economic nodes holding real coins still decide the ledger. blackrock’s hype is priced in; the rest of us decide what gets finality. confidence ain’t gone, it just filtered to the quiet hodler running 27.2.
Ja, das muss ich wohl ändern. Seit wann denkst du denn dass Bitcoin es nicht schafft? Früher warst du ein Verfechter für Bitcoin…
Bitcoin is frequently misunderstood in this regard.
It's the most anarcho-capitalist system ever invented, WITHIN the network itself. Property rights are absolute, defined by Math.
But OUTSIDE of itself, Bitcoin is just another open-source project, which is effectively anarcho-communist. It's a collective of worker-volunteers who make decisions as a group.
Even if you can "own" a Bitcoin in a way you could never own anything before, Bitcoin itself is "owned" by no one. There's the paradox!
So, unless adoption had taken off, and there‘d be millions of nodes and miners, the project is extremely vulnerable. One could say, people didn’t get it, thus it failed?
Well yeah, there's a flywheel between the number of nodes, hashrate, (fiat) Price of BTC, and developer involvement... Once BTC made a few ~10x's of growth, that would have been sufficient to reward early developers and presumably keep them in the project.
Of course some will always "rage quit", and other new ones will join over time. But the scenario where this doesn't happen is exactly what has come to pass with a number of "altcoin" projects over the years, also forks on BTC like BCash and whatever Craig Wright's scam was.