Replying to Avatar DRE

Wut? That first statement made no sense.

I’m asking what about the protocol is broken and needs to be fixed besides the unix timestamp issue? I’m guessing nothing since you didn’t point it out.

The problem it fixes is well understood. I didn’t get here yesterday. Yes, i think the problem is appropriately addressed.

These protocol changes are motivated by ideological reasons not catastrophic flaws in bitcoin’s design. “Everyone needs to own a UTXO” and the like. It’s not as if satoshi didn’t know not everyone was not going to be able to transact on L1.
Avatar
average_bitcoiner 1y ago

"A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online

payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a

financial institution."

If I am unable to go to main chain, I am now going through a financial institution.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
DRE 1y ago

That statement is true today and will continue to be true.

Anyone that wants to enjoy those benefits can today. The people that these changes are aimed to “help” don’t even know Bitcoin exists, they don’t care or like Bitcoin, or would rather use a financial institution.

When these people that can’t transact on-chain and are actively using custodial LN or ecash, and the livelihood of their families depends on using Bitcoin sovereignly start asking for changes, then I’ll take it more seriously.