you can't tell me what to do with a simple network protocol. it's made to enable it, but how you enable it really depends because there is nothing good that comes from manipulative and abusive speech designed to torment people. you can't actually have free speech for the rest of us without excluding those who use it as a weapon of torment. this business of confusing the goals of early designers and what the system is fit for is a really big problem too. yes, satoshi made bitcoin to be an open distributed monetary ledger that made the monetary equivalent of trolling and bullying - double spends and spam, expensive. turns out that he didn't close bitcoin up tight enough to prevent that, and i for one would like to see some bitcoiners start to acknowledge that. this doctrine of zero to one from knut svanholm also makes it seem like, with magical, fallacious logic, that it is impossible to improve upon, and the myth that satoshi had to disappear to protect bitcoin. no, i don't think so. gavin andreesen was about to hand satoshi to the CIA that's plenty enough reason to disappear. it's also a strong proof against the idea that he was a fabrication of the CIA since he stopped posting on the internet when he got invited to talk to them. i think the only thing that has stopped bitcoin collapsing has been an active campaign, by the CIA, to maintain an ongoing crisis/resolution process about bear/bull theses because they have been working to compromise it and put it under covert control since then. who do you think was encouraging those clowns in the blocksize wars, and how they wound up opening one vulnerability and a two tier price structure for bitcoin data. then they slammed it wide open with taproot, and their next move is to put covenants on it. bitcoin with covenants and unlimited arbitrary data sounds a lot like a CDBC to me, then the whole core OP_RETURN troll brigading that went on at twitter and here on nostr, that had every bitchass clown such as jb55 abusing people for wanting sovereignty of their node's mempool. only thing you then need to take total control is 51% of the miners, being beholden to the USG and censoring it and claiming to allow paying taxes in this now fully controlled monetary protocol. no, there has to be a way to improve on what satoshi did, and with the seething crowds of degens and shitcoin devs, i don't think a legitimate successor to bitcoin is going to even be noticed, even with AI help, before it's too far into adoption.