pull down to refresh
Bitcoin is there to be forked, if he dies he dies 💁
I like the idea of a new chain, let's see what it brings
Ideological stackers need to be careful they dont turn real Bitcoin into a sacred cow that can't be touched....I think Paul said that BTW
I'll keep my real Bitcoin and I'll keep my eCash
If the precious maxis cry about it, keep crying
Not insinuating opti is any of those criticisms BTW to be clear
I don't know how long you've been around for. But we've seen this before. If this is your first time, just be careful and please be extremely conservative in your promotion of shit, i.e. to the point where you don't promote it. The shitcoin section of bitcointalk is probably in hindsight the worst thing ever platformed by Bitcoiners.
I'm not even a Bitcoin maxi when it pertains to others - I can totally tolerate that the default mode in 99% of the population is lazy retardation - despite believing that adopting a purity stance like Darth pushes, as a pretty good indicator of what to ignore / stop using / stay the fuck away from. It's not just a moral thing, it's a defensive mechanism against scammers. I'm a freedom maxi at the core though, so do whatever the fuck you want - I don't want to tell you what to do, except in the occasional shitpost.
Just, please make shitter.news if you have a desire to spread shitcoin narratives. Every stacker that finds all this "intriguing", and is possibly going to get rekt from this shitfork, is a direct effect of platforming Paul & co and insufficiently pushing back. I don't like it if a generally thoughtful platform like SN is causing that for others. We should be educating stackers, not throw them in a snakepit with a bunch of completely jaded hardforkers.
Okay, exhales deeply. First of all cracks knuckles, second of all, I didn't even bring this up The original poster did, which was Scoresby, hang on a minute, let me just drag Scoresby out from underneath the bus.
Okay So the only reason I bring this up is because, um, Scoresby invited Paul onto the platform, which is how I came to see what eCASH was.
So Hang on, let me get Scoresby and drag him out from underneath the bus yet again 🤣🤣🤣
Bitcoin is there to be forked, if he dies he dies 💁
I like the idea of a new chain, let's see what it brings
Ideological stackers need to be careful they dont turn real Bitcoin into a sacred cow that can't be touched....I think Paul said that BTW
So this is your newly formed opinion ever since you saw that AMA? And nothing said can change your mind? Then you prove my point. In fact, you embody it.
Uh I don't really care whether you call it a newly formed opinion or not
If my view changes because I hear a good argument or see something interesting, that's fine
If you think that proves your point, then fine
I'm not a reactionary person, I'm not interested in defending an opinion for the sake of consistency
If I end up agreeing with an idea because it makes sense to me, then I do
If that means I embody your point, then so be it
Much love opti, just setting out my stall
Hmm my comment was an antecedent pair followed by a consequent pair. I'm asking if it is so, not arguing that it is so, per se. It's interesting because there's something to be learned here.
I explicitly avoided Paul's AMA because I'm tired of the ever expanding scope of how everything in Bitcoin is wrong and Paul's solution is the only one that can save our poor souls and it solves literally everything from bipcoiners to cashcoiners to fee supply to people getting rekt on other shitcoins to well... the eventual heat death of the universe. I've been hearing that shit for 12 years. Like.. if only we had deployed drivechains then Paul's friend Ver would never have supported BCash and there would have never been a blocksize war. Right? Holy shit bro. We need drivechains tomorrow.
So, I probably made a mistake. Like I said, do whatever you like, no one should be able to stop you.
Paul has been one of the top debaters in the space for approximately as long as I've been around; maybe longer, I didn't do historiography on it. He's really very smart.
When he offered drivechains initially, I understood it at the time as a mechanism to basically improve on the merge mining / auxpow thing that namecoin did, and reel in all shitcoinery born out of a research/expansion desire. Not so much "there can be only one", but incentivize that "there could be only one" through network effect. Like a liberal approach to maximalism. It requires a small paradigm shift in "what Bitcoin is" and I think what most people were/are afraid of is the expansion into a permanent state of dealing with unknown unknowns.
I think (but I'm not an expert on this) that chains that did adopt similar concepts, like Ethereum, have suffered direct consequences of this (and infamously rolled back and hard forked over a 3rd party smart contract bug.) Being agnostic while allowing anyone to integrate freely not with but into the base layer is therefore proven risky. The whole BIP-110 thing is technically a feature of the opposite direction.
I've always seen the failure of drivechain to gain traction as a function of conservatism / risk aversion from people simply not being convinced that the benefits outweigh the potential risks. No matter how smart you are, how well you can narrate and debate, if there is no consensus, then it won't go live. This is why BIP-110 should fail to gain traction too.
Paul doesn't let go. Which is a great treat to have. It's also annoying af for everyone else when there just isn't consensus. Forking off is capitulation. However, the narrative that Bitcoin will fail is born out of a need to cope first. You're all wrong, so I will find talking points why you're all wrong, and then I will fork and prove it to you by taking over.
Buying people by overlord-ish redistribution is disingenuous and I still wonder who advocated this and put it in Paul's head. Imagine a redistributed chain becomes the #1. Good luck defending against CSW 2.0.