You can’t stop people from using Bitcoin for non-monetary uses.
You’re free to try though.
Login to reply
Replies (2)
The market will decide if that statement is correct or not, as it always does in the end. :)
That's the good thing about this whole model in the end. This might be the beginning of a soft fork, and the user is fortunately on both sides. So the user, people, never really lose in this argument. Whatever works they'll be there and benefit from it.
I'm happy for that at least.
People can _try_ using Bitcoin for non-monetary uses.
But the key is what nodes _allow_.
I 💜 Bitcoin Knots.
So, who secures Bitcoin?!
If securing Bitcoin requires consensus on what Bitcoin is, and Bitcoin is a database of values assigned to keys, and Bitcoin has a protocol for reassignment of keys, then securing Bitcoin can only be done by … your node!
Nodes! Nodes! Nodes!
In the end, YOU secure Bitcoin, but the only time that matters is when you agree with someone else on what Bitcoin is, and the only way that you can express yourself to others is via your node.
You can try to abstract this and say that hodlers of last resort secure it, or that you can express yourself by buying or selling, but the only way you can actually communicate yourself is via enforcement of the protocol.
What about Miners?
Miners are suppliers of blocks, nothing more. Nodes demand consensus-compatible blocks as a vessel for key reassignment. Miners’ ability to influence the protocol is limited to the wiggle room within the protocol’s magic numbers.
from
https://medium.com/bitcoinerrorlog/who-secures-bitcoin-95b19bbcda3c
View quoted note →