Succinct guide for any audience really (except anarchists … they don’t require bitcoin complement governance) - I almost feel like creating a conservative port - but it’s nice to have something targeted.
pull down to refresh
pull down to refresh
Succinct guide for any audience really (except anarchists … they don’t require bitcoin complement governance) - I almost feel like creating a conservative port - but it’s nice to have something targeted.
I just don't know how "progressives" can reconcile proof of work. No matter how it's sliced or rebranded, the basic premise of "progressives" is socialism, which is taking from one group (the producers) and giving to another group (the non-producing receivers). All that verbiage like a more "just and equitable" world is just framing and marketing of this basic premise. And, this premise is fundamentally the opposite of how bitcoin works.
<paste this on the "change my mind" meme>
“The Plumbing Divide”
Progressivism’s blueprint:
• Procedure: redistribute the flow.
• Authority: external (“We decide who needs water”).
• Goal: equity as the output.
Bitcoin’s blueprint:
• Procedure: prove the pump was run.
• Authority: internal (“Math decides what, who worked, why and revelation”).
• Goal: proof as output.
The clash?
Two systems.
One valve.
One says:
“We’ll reroute the pipes for fairness.”
The other says:
“The pipes don’t care. Run the pump or find an oasis so that one thirsts no more.”
Reconciliation?
Not a tweak.
A choice.
Consensus on outcomes?
Or consensus on proof?
The debate isn’t policy.
It’s mathematical physics.
Pick the manifold.