Avatar
Legion XXI
8476d0dcdb53f1cc67efc8d33f40104394da2d33e61369a8a8ade288036977c6
The sun has risen..

I prefer custodial vs self-custodial.

The term “non” implies absence or lacking a characteristic and thus can be confusing or even perceived negatively in this context, specially for people who are just learning.

“If you give your seed phrase over the phone then you don’t deserve it” nostr:note14qremgdht7kpvymmaezhds2wmw42l89z0hcspjg2n4cn6ljcu5vsn0nush

Another example of creating depressing content.. Are you surrendering? 😜

You used to post funny memes.. I get it, you are evolving somewhere and thus your account is evolving too, and the message is important. Sure. But by dropping the humor you’re losing the punch ;)

If you are eating tacos you’re helping the bad guys launder money 🌮

Replying to Avatar jack mallers

my opinions don’t change if i learn what happened in some random convo. Bitcoin doesn’t care.

we need a healthy open source Bitcoin community. period. no matter what. Bitcoin won’t succeed without one. even if we want to ossify, Bitcoin Core 26.0 won’t last us centuries to come. open source projects need open source devs and an open source community.

we should focus on no strings attached funding for devs. the community has worked tirelessly to set this up with things like OpenSats, Brink, HRF, Chaincode, etc. to enable that effortlessly for us and the devs.

we as Bitcoiners should want devs to build whatever they think is best. engineers are the artists of the digital world. the smartest most forward thinkers in the room. we want to enable them. they aren’t ever a threat, don’t mistaken them for one. why? because the only way Bitcoin can change is if we, the network, run their code. let them create. we the network, the people, decide what gets adopted.

if someone builds something terrible, we won’t run it. that’s happened many times before. see Segwit2x, BitcoinCash, etc.

often times engineers strike moments of brilliance in Bitcoin. a very famous example is Segwit and how we got Lightning. nobody thought Segwit was possible technically. was never clear if or when we’d ever get Lightning. a few open source engineers named Luke and Eric found a brilliant solution. we adopted it. we now have Lightning being enabled by Coinbase. let engineers create art. fund and support them.

wanna ossify Bitcoin? run Core 26 forever and never update. no problem. don’t wanna fund devs? no problem. we don’t need to agree on these things. however, if you want the entire network to agree with you, you need to go out and advocate for consensus around your vision. that’s just how bitcoin works. the network moves as one, not from a meeting or self elected group.

bitcoin is a distributed network. it progresses through distributed consensus. the network will act in its own best interest, not based on anything else. fund the best engineers to protect and advance the one chance we have at reinventing money for humanity. adopt what we want, reject what we don’t. if there’s anything we need to work on every cycle with new entrants is public discourse and how to arrive at consensus as a distributed network.

also, everyone should breathe. it’s all love and gonna be ok. Bitcoin was designed to not care and last through anything 🙂

nostr:note129fcpjqxnrvrm9rzv6cmj2fu0qfatmwzh5a0nrq54alej8t9ht8qgd47wp

Bitcoin doesn’t care what you think ☺️

Wise words.. nostr:note1rae3r6dygdta0ws8qhy3zfvcpa3aeae2j0a02lastv7avayeaugqzlyjjr

Replying to Avatar Aaron van Wirdum

Listened to Michael Saylor on the nostr:npub1r8l06leee9kjlam0slmky7h8j9zme9ca32erypgqtyu6t2gnhshs3jx5dk podcast. It's 3 months old, but sheds some light on the ARK funding story.

https://youtu.be/_QN0RcQFf6w

TL;DW: Saylor strongly believes in *OSSIFICATION NOW*. From that POV, protocol development is a liability.

Some quotes (and thoughts)👇

"You only get to play God once. And Satoshi played God. And you can say 'well Satoshi got to do it, why can't I?' Well the answer is Satoshi did it, the reason we're talking about Satoshi is 'cause the other 100,000 would-be Satoshis failed. If you read the history of the world, work your way through 10,000 pages of Western history, there will be thousands and thousands and thousands of episodes of 'alpha male thinks he was put on this earth, you know, to change everything', full of hubris [...] he's gotta do more, change more, etcetera.'" (53:34)

"Bitcoin Core developers, or protocol developers, they want to fix something, or they want to make a contribution, because it's in their DNA, but developers are just the lawyers of cyberspace. When a lawyer shows up at the capital, they gotta make a law to save you from yourself, and the more laws they make, the more they cripple the economy, until eventually there's so many laws that the entire civilization collapses under its own weight." (58:06)

"The world is full of people that need something to do. I would say, the real key to wisdom, channel your energy constructively. If you're gonna do something, improve Lightning, build an application, persuade someone to adopt Bitcoin as a reserve asset, educate someone… these are all constructive things. Destructive, dilutive, distractive things are: fight with random people 'cause they want to fight with you, attack the core network and make it confusing and introduce anxiety, and confusion and fear, uncertainty and doubt into the base layer. Right? And then attempt to imprint your ego, you know, on the base protocol, you know? Like, 'I gotta introduce this so my name will go down in history forever'." (2:38:55)

My view: it's understandable to want Bitcoin to behave like the granite under Manhattan (his analogy); a solid bedrock that never changes. Especially if you truly believe Bitcoin will take over the world as SoV-only and "there is no second best". But IMO this is wishful thinking. While I agree it's near-impossible for an alt to overtake Bitcoin, I do think adoption could stall.

Luckily, Bitcoin isn't really a natural element. It's spontaneous order, more like language. Hard to change and no one can dictate changes, but if market wants it to change, it can.

Furthermore, despite Stephan asking a few questions in that direction, Saylor mostly failed to distinguish between protocol upgrades and general software maintenance.

Arguing against any hard/soft forks is one thing, but Bitcoin Core 26.0 can obviously not last for centuries...

Having said that, Saylor is of course free to not upgrade anymore and stick to Bitcoin Core 26.0 for as long as he lives.

BITCOIN DOESN’T CARE WHAT ODELL THINKS!!!

Saylor has shown he is a clever man with a lot of skin in the game. All those reasons stated there are pretty valid.

People criticising him right for this, might have too much ego themselves. Critics pretend they have studied and thought about Bitcoin more than he or anybody has.

Base layer shouldn’t be mess around too much regardless if your hero is Saylor or Odell.

Slay your heroes! nostr:note1t58456vay29vuu4c8zvk0sq3m6aflw679htp7yh5sp9xg4rc27lqynu33w