Correct, but I think Bitcoin needs supporters and to some degree protectors. That's the job of the full nodes and the true Bitcoin loyalist.

Corruption of the code and the hard money protocol with things like Ordinals etc is a problem. The full nodes are responsible for enforcing a virtuous, hard money, Bitcoin protocol.

We have to get on top of code development. Provide supervision and make sure it stays on track as decentralized, virtuous, hard money for the World.

In the early days most of the nodes contributed to code development with Satoshi..🧡

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Wrt ordinals I think the free market is handling this fine. I looked on degen Twitter and saw people talking about them being dead already. As predicted they move onto the next thing fast.

We can't stay true to the mission of being censorship resistant if we censor.

It's not censorship. That's a myth pushed by people who want to corrupt and extinguish Bitcoin.

You can't censor something that doesn't belong there in the first place.

It's an attack on Bitcoin. A bug, a back door to spam.

It's a way of artificially inflating fees. It's a back door way of creating Bitcoin inflation, and debasing bitcoins monetary policy.

In recreates the Fiat cantilian effect where the people closest to the money printer get the most money by taking it from you in artificially inflated fees and debasement.

It's also a form of criminal fraud and larceny. Fiducial failure. But it's not censorship..🧡

Controlling what transactions are allowed in blocks, regardless of intent, sets a terrible precedent for the future.

What if a nation state begins pressuring the Bitcoin Core devs to censor other transactions they dislike? They can pretty much force that OFAC sanctions be added. Then we are no better than Ethereum.

Bitcoin must remain neutral to remain censorship resistant for its original purpose, else you head down a very slippery slope.

Agreed 100%. We all know what controll means for money. Btc runs and holds the line just fine. Let it work.

Exactly. The second we start adding any type of central control regarding what can be put into blocks we are no better than a CBDC.

Now if individual miners don't want to mine blocks full of ordinals that's their right as it's the free market in action.

But we cannot have Bitcoin as a protocol breaking the core of its censorship resistance over jpeg drama.

This is the PRINCIPLE. It self regulates itself just fine.

The slippery slope is encouraging fraud and larceny. That dog won't hunt..🧡🙂

I absolutely agree with your comment. The choice of what software to run in a full node or mining is a vital choice we have as bitcoin loyalists. And your point about the controversy over ordinals, in my view foreshadows more controversies to come. I agree that early-stage code development was a great thing that birthed Bitcoin, but further development at this stage risks fragmenting bitcoin (see Ethereum as an example - after the switch to POS many miners revolted and backed Ethereum Classic).

In my opinion what's critical is that virtuous full nodes and loyalist keep the faith.

That virtuous full nodes and loyalist clearly understand what #Bitcoin Is! and what Bitcoin is Not!

Bitcoin is Virtuous hard money. It's the most secure financial Network in the world.

It's the only highly valuable personal property You! can Truly! own, and should last for thousands of years.

The full nodes and loyalist are responsible for all this. We are the ones that enforce the code and the protocol.

Regardless of what miners or developers do,

we are the ones that are responsible.

Whether they like it or not they are accountable to us. Just as we are accountable for the purity and virtuousness of the the code and the Bitcoin protocol we enforce.

There are no rock stars in Bitcoin. No gurus. No one is indispensable. Bitcoin doesn't care. We are but bitcoins servants and beneficiaries.

Absent all this it's not Bitcoin. It's #shitcoin..🧡