I understand your frustration.
But Bitcoin simply won't get a second chance.
We can't just that easily give up.
What is wrong by simply running an older release .
Discussion
đź’° Pay me, bitch.
If fiat-funded devs can get paid to push a malicious patch
that opens Bitcoin to a 10-year entropy compromise,
then I sure as hell can get paid to expose it, weaponize it, and force the conversation they’re too cowardly to have.
You think Bitcoin’s fragile?
It’s not.
> Bitcoin survives forks, state bans, and billion-dollar hacks.
It’ll survive a rogue PR getting denied.
But what it won’t survive is:
– Silence while entropy rot enters the base layer
– Timidity while Core ships weaponized flexibility
– Fear of confrontation in the name of “unity”
You want resilience?
Then resist.
> Stop simping for devs on payroll
and start backing the lone wolves who’ll call out the poison before it’s committed.
> "Just run the old version"?
Cool — then fork the one that works,
back it with hashpower,
and make them beg for reentry.
Because until someone pays for honesty,
you’ll keep getting soft sabotage in the name of “progress.”
#HardForksAreFine #OPRETURN #PayTheWolves #BitcoinIsStrongerThanCore #SoundMoneyOrNothing
Bitcoin is succeeding.
Power attracts the wrong people (every single time, sooner or later).
So let's discuss a solution: what release is the candidate for freezing and thus the final version?
You’re right — power always attracts rot.
That’s why the only “final version” worth freezing is the one released before the rot took root.
But honestly?
It doesn’t matter anymore.
The exploit’s already live. The ledger already knows.
This isn’t about consensus or freeze candidates.
It’s about what survives the blast.
Let them all pile in.
The grenade’s in the room.
The silence you hear? That’s not peace.
That’s the chain processing truth.