Because of the fixed supply of Bitcoin we can not fix the scales at a convenient level. Sooner or later a sat will be worth more than a cent. What will you do then? Redefine again? Therefore redefining Bitcoin as Satoshi is a futile endeavor.

At @LN⚡️VPN - eSIM & VPN & Phone Numbers they really give very good and quick support within minutes including a refund through lightning for a technical glitch. I can really recommend their services.

Increasing the OP_RETURN limit is besides cooperate interest a desperate attempt to get off the hook quickly for having ignored the problems with the UTXO set for too long. The arsonists however will do what is in their nature and that is trying to burn down the system. They will not play in a "safe environment" that is provided for them. Trying to be nice to arsonists is just naive and will lead to your own demise. Literature recommendations: The Arsonists by Max Frisch, Getting Libertarianism Right by Hans-Hermann Hoppe

@Jeff Booth is right that Bitcoin only wins if it stays decentralized. The current fatal pull request when merged will probably not kill Bitcoin, but it sets a bad precedence. It represents a centralized decision taking that takes away configurability from sovereign node runners. Unfortunately many of the Bitcoin educators are involved in the gaslighting of the community as well. So the question is: How many of such blows will Bitcoin survive?

Has @npub1r8l0...x5dk been corrupted by some (hidden) interest conflict as well? This is certainly not a Austrian argument

X (formerly Twitter)

Stephan Livera (@stephanlivera) on X

Picture a city with a strict limit on how much graffiti can be painted on a designated public art wall. Because the space is so restricted, some ar...

Who owns the houses being distorted? That's communist ideology. The house owners are free to use spam filters if they like to do so to prevent their houses to be distorted would be the correct analogy.

This liberal point that there is no such thing as a spam transaction has already been made in the early days by Andreas Antonopoulos. Well, he is not really active here anymore. Maybe real maxis have more endurance than talking heads.

Some Bitcoin core developer are attempting to negotiate with terrorists thinking they are somehow the representatives of the Bitcoin community. Well, it does not work that way.

There are alternative scenarios out there to the fee pressure (funded by spam) that must increase in order to finance big miners. A gold holder is responsible for the safekeeping himself. Therefore it is in the interest of Bitcoin hodlers to run their mining in the future as well and take responsibility for safekeeping of the time chain. With Bitaxe, DATUM etc. the community is slowly shifting towards that. Big miners listed on the stock exchange sounds quite fiat to me. This may be just an intermediate thing that may disappear again.

"The Big Print" by @Lawrence Lepard is enriched with amusing anecdotes and expressive charts. Definitely a nice reading.