That's why I believe Bitcoin was in fact being attacked from both sides (by banks) from 2014-2017.
On one side small blockers permanently freezing the Bitcoin state (development lock) on the other hand side giga blockers that wanted to repurpose the monetary use to an everything data storage in a few data centres.
The voices in the middle got drained out. BCH split from BTC to preserve a chain state before SegWit bloat. Then it had to go through another split with giga blockers lead by fraud CW (BSV). Then another fork over introduction of PoS and a dev tax.
It still preserved a rather original Bitcoin state that still works but the market is not recognising it as an option anymore as two more things got into the spotlight.
Privacy and fungibility.
So by now most people looking for the monetary use case switched to Monero.
Monero also fixed long-term security with tail emisson.
Monero fixed mining decentralisation with ASIC resistance (1 CPU 1 vote) and P2P mining pools.
Monero fixed long-term growth with dynamic block sizes.
Monero is not compromising the monetary use case with data storage (ordinals).
Login to reply
Replies (1)
It's all a matter of trade-offs.
I agree that there is a place for a privacy-oriented alternative and Monero seems to be the only option.
I'll have to spend a day to do at least some surface-level research because I know very little and I'm interested what I'd find.
I am on the side of ossification unless existential threat. W/e developers want to do, they can do on L2/3.
You let developers fuck around for long enough and they'll fuck every project up.
After every update ossification becomes less of an option just because developers have fucked the protocol so much.