Thread

It would, yet not sure it's possible, after all such is the nature of decentralized systems. What I don't understand from the Monero people is their motivation for considering Bitcoin compromised / almost failing. It seems to me that Bitcoin can, from a technical perspective, still be used in ways which adhere to the original cypherpunk ethos: - you can buy it staying away from KYC - you can do coinjoins - you can open LN channels, close them when done, and shuffle things around some more with further coinjoins if you like Mining is however very much centralized though. That's the weakest structural point of the Bitcoin edifice. But the main point remains: is Bitcoin compromised, or is it simply that the masses that have been exposed to don't see the problem it's trying to solve in the first place and end up wrapping it in institutional paper games? Are we dealing with an inevitable cultural problem that other projects would also have to be confronted with the moment they become "popular", or is there something else going on, such as a long term state level attack?

"compromised" is a matter of perspective the *trajectory* is wrong if the end goal is permissionless freedom money. there is both an inevitable cultural problem AND a state level regulatory attack, that Bitcoiners vastly underestimate. The regulatory capture playbook is well-understood. But there are no substantial voices in Bitcoin talking about it. and sure, it's technically possible to use Bitcoin privately right now. but everyone is hoping to get legal permission to continue using it privately, rather than make it impossible to prevent using it privately. which is where Monero diverges in philosophy.