I've spent less than 15 minutes looking at this debate, but can already see it's basically the same kind of debate as rbf, so it's not worth investing much time into it. Looks like bike shedding to me.
It brings mempool filtering in line with consensus rules, which is needed for mempool to remain relevant long term (otherwise other transaction markets will replace it).
This has no consequence over whether or not bitcoin is used as money or as some kind of permanent storage - the market determines how to price those use cases.
If we want bitcoin to be used as money, we need to start producing seriously valuable goods and services that the market will kill for. Since we are bitcoiners and we only accept bitcoin, the broader market that wants what we produce must adopt it. To put it another way, a bitcoin standard just means that society is dependent on bitcoiners to produce everything.
yes I agree with what you said, but don't you find it odd the way the change has been proposed, pushed and approved in such short time frame?
don't you find odd how core handled opposing views and censured them? and why all of a sudden core stopped caring about btc as money transfer, and now they care more about what the market wants?
it all seems so fishy, all this happening all of a sudden and in this way...
I'm not a big fan of core, and I don't run their implementation anymore. But I also don't believe this particular action is malevolent, some of the things that some of the core guys have done certainly is though.
thanks for he convo man much appreciated. I see this change as a very important one that can have big consequences and I'm super worried, but I see that this is talked so little on btc "socials" almost like it's no big deal at all....either I'm paranoid or simply wrong
It's OK to be paranoid đź«‚
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
I need to know this “bike shedding” analogy
Thread collapsed