Identifying as a Bitcoiner effectively circumscribes which financial freedom technologies are available for consideration. Was the discourse more open and more intellectually honest in the pre-Bitcoin era?
Discussion
I think you can be a bitcoiner and be open to considering various forms of freedom both financial and otherwise.
e.g. a lot of bitcoiners are talking about ecash and various forms of stablecoins/stablecash these days. I even know hardcore bitcoiners who are developing stablecoin solutions that touch alternative L1s. this kind of stuff seems to more commonly discussed in private
I think there were fewer lanes of opinions considered reasonable pre-internet. There are vastly more lanes that people will express now. That opens up to better discovery of fundamental truths we may have missed before.
There’s more tribalism online now than there was pre-bitcoin. The online platforms were much less algorithmically driven pre-bitcoin. I think that’s the biggest change.
Well done, you have nailed my underlying intention with L1 needing to be on the table and tribalism addressed. One thing with L1 is the time factor, as the right L1 could effectively present with faith accompli. Do you have suggestions as to how to access the private discussions?
In any event, thanks for this well-considered response, and in particular for the positive note that in fact more lanes of inquiry are now open, and the whole principle that there can be yet more fundamental truths still needing to be uncovered via free discourse.