pull down to refresh
I wonder if I can make a bit if a Pascal's wager here: I'm afraid that I sound a little like Bitpain's ancap losers (at least my fantasies are like that), but i get occasional glimmers of this other vision of Bitcoin, the one you describe here. And it makes sense to me.
So perhaps I'll go along with the unimportant preferables, but place my hopes in the inevitability of Bitcoin cucking the central banks.
If you think it is inescapable that Bitcoin becomes the successor to central banks, how does one know what is worth working on in Bitcoin?
The preferables aren't mutually exclusive to the bigger picture, as those things are maximally good for many individuals. The capacity to understand that they are not material to Bitcoin benefiting all individuals is what losers lack.
Since the globalist order collapsing under the pressure imposed by Bitcoin's mere existence benefits everyone, virtual signaling about how ancap one must be is even bottom tier at virtual signaling. Losers as described by Bitpaine can't help but be bottom tier in all they do.
how does one know what is worth working on in Bitcoin?
It starts with asking ones self the question, why work on it. Working on something to help Bitcoin is always the wrong answer, since you can't help Bitcoin.
You can however help others. So how can you best help others?
If that involves Bitcoin directly, great. But maybe what you're good at is better for mining fiat and saving in Bitcoin. What you work on is deeply personal to your specific value proposition.
This may seem counter-intuitive coming from someone who works on decentralized sovereign stuff in the Bitcoin ecosystem. I know I can't help Bitcoin, but I can help people use Bitcoin in ways they might not otherwise.
If more people use Bitcoin in this way, it will make the internet better and create new businesses, but that's only achievable if Bitcoin is.
Bitcoin helps me build a vision, it's not my vision for Bitcoin.
And even that is purely a combination of my interests and my vocation overlapping, it won't effect Bitcoin's march to global reserve currency status one way or another.
Don't need to, just because its preferable doesn't make it materially important.
Same.
Same.
These are mostly just virtue signals Bitcoiners tell themselves, they'd be nice to haves, but not a KPI as long as the optionality exists. Let idiots like Vlad think this matters, more Bitcoin for us... it just further illustrates why he's a shitcoiner. He doesn't understand Bitcoin itself, forget maximalism.
Gross display of, completely arbitrary, time preference
Where are those miners overwhelmingly saving their rewards?
If that developer is saving in Bitcoin what they earn from other projects/scamming, they are a smart developer.
Sophistry
This also doesn't matter, most projects are vanity projects or for personal gain. None of it is material to Bitcoin itself. It's gravity is unaltered by the space dust around it.
I almost spit out my coffee the other morning when, for the first time in probably 10+ years, Brian Armstrong let on that he got Bitcoin. He demonstrated his understanding of all that matters is it being the successor to central banks, is already keeping them in-check, and that is inescapable. Then Fink today with the "1-chain" quote.
People like Vlad will virtue signal at every opportunity, get distracted by Toyota Supras and shitcoins, while his moral inferiors actually disembowel the globalist system.