nostr:nevent1qqs0n5lfm3u54awj279h5rul2seu2uyxgc56qw9pau46k28aaseryqsppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qy2hwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytn00p68ytnyv4mz7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejz78yg9jr

He explicitly argued that a miner who spends $1B on mining infra should not have their investment undermined by protocol changes. It was pretty concrete!

They would definitely argue that a protocol change which increased space efficiency would have a short-term effect on fee revenue, right? It seems a pretty clear-cut case where Saylor's model is directly against most people's understanding of what we should improve.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I think he said that to make a point. It was actually a great way to illustrate the nuances of changes. But I don't think he said he'd be against segwit or other efficiency changes.

I think we all know that Bitcoin needs to scale to be most effective and that means efficiency changes. Net positive because reaching a max capacity would stifle its adoption and its valuation growth.