A lot of idealistic coders think that by explaining the technical reasoning, they can get people on their side of the argument.
I get why. In technical circles, there really is often one best practice and you can arrive at consensus through explaining the nuances of the issue, though that happens far less often than is believed.
But this current argument really isn't a technical one. It's a social, monetary and economic one and no amount of technical nuance-splaining is going to get consensus. I applaud the effort, but the higher level question that we're all really fighting about is this:
What is Bitcoin?
Is it money? Or is it money and ...?
Replies (18)
If you can't answer that then you should not be a Bitcoin Dev and go to Solana. Of course they won't as they need to try and extract value out of Bitcoin.
This is the heart of it. Very simple.
jimmysong
A lot of idealistic coders think that by explaining the technical reasoning, they can get people on their side of the argument.
I get why. In technical circles, there really is often one best practice and you can arrive at consensus through explaining the nuances of the issue, though that happens far less often than is believed.
But this current argument really isn't a technical one. It's a social, monetary and economic one and no amount of technical nuance-splaining is going to get consensus. I applaud the effort, but the higher level question that we're all really fighting about is this:
What is Bitcoin?
Is it money? Or is it money and ...?
View quoted note →
Yeah! Keep telling them, Jimmy! This is why we have Segwit
If Core wants: There’s plenty of room for their jpegs and crap in Bitcoin Cash. That was why they forked iirc
....FREEDOM
ENJOY THE NOISE
There is *some* argument for other data, specifically hash proofs. This will be indirectly momentary data.
I think 1:1 backed side-chains are a good idea, and we can prove and secure balances within that chain via the root of a Merkel tree on L1, and a small payload (32kb or less) from the other client.
Money
I keep hearing about technical arguments for the op_return PR. What are they? Please someone dazzle me with your profound technical arguments. This is all about shitcoiners wanting to shitcoin on bitcoin. They try to hide it behind it being too technical for mere mortals to understand, but this is all there is to it.
Can we have more of this sobriety in the Bitcoin tech circles?
Yep. Thanks Jimmy. Clear as always. By the way, shared your book "Fiat Ruins Everything" and he couldn't get very far. His reaction ... "everything is so negative..."
#bitcoin is a multiple female orgasm. Cannot have that. But they can stack sats. 🧡
Could be a head thing. Imho
Bitcoin is money and attempts to use it as anything else should be made as difficult as possible, lest it becomes inferior money.
Excellent analysis. Excellent observation. I think the answer to your question is completely personal and I think there is no 100% correct answer. Surely ₿ it's money. But surely it's also something else as far as I'm concerned. Everyone has their own opinion but reducing ₿ to just money seems very reductive to me 🤷♂️
nevent1qqsdm5n5dm9ljfvfd5ppvjvht2q6xs6cf0wv2fdsec9s6akenaq2yds5et3wq
Excellent analysis. Excellent observation. I think the answer to your question is completely personal and I think there is no 100% correct answer. Surely ₿ it's money. But surely it's also something else as far as I'm concerned. Everyone has their own opinion but reducing ₿ to just money seems very reductive to me 🤷♂️
this argument is actually one of the most meaningful technical conversations in awhile and it has truly illuminated who is who
Idealistic coders… do you guys see how much they hate builders yet?
nevent1qqsdm5n5dm9ljfvfd5ppvjvht2q6xs6cf0wv2fdsec9s6akenaq2yds5et3wq
Programmable money
Bitcoin is the best money and that's it
