Sorry! It’s just that you’re going to have to pay/ask permission to use Bitcoin \ stacker news ~bitcoin

Sorry! It’s just that you’re going to have to pay/ask permission to use Bitcoin jarolrod.com/you-must-pay/

3107 sats \ 25 comments \ @jarolrod 5 May 2023 bitcoin freebie

399 sats \ 1 reply \ @gnilma 5 May 2023

Hmmm... but Bitcoin Core does have a built in GUI wallet.

And if you don't want to use Bitcoin Core's built in wallet, you can install a free and open source wallet (such as Sparrow or Spectre), and connect the wallet to Bitcoin Core RPC server on the same machine.

There are many options and ways to using bitcoin, and not all require payment or permission.

128 sats \ 0 replies \ @jarolrod OP 6 May 2023

See: #174612

426 sats \ 1 reply \ @nerd2ninja 5 May 2023

Okay

Lol, you see, I was thinking about making a Gui using Ruby's Glimmer gem as a frontend for bitcoind that sets the RPC auth methods automatically and over local host, but I didn't feel motivated. Bitcoin core does have its own GUI and you can even transmit PSBTs with it.

Actually can you go into more detail about the inspiration behind why you made this post?

440 sats \ 0 replies \ @jarolrod OP 6 May 2023

I work on core. This is meant as an amusing way to point out an issue and why it's very important to support truly free & open source UI's instead of just the protocol stuff. If the only way that non-technical people can use bitcoin is through corporate API's because we didn't value building out these non-corporate UI's, we didn't do anything good here. Support projects like sparrow, and the bitcoin core gui https://bitcoincore.app :)

502 sats \ 4 replies \ @TonyGiorgio 6 May 2023

Sure, it needs to be easier to run a node. But bitcoin isn't free to use and that's not going to change whether or not we get core to run on a $1000 smartphone (which has a cost that needs to be paid for BTW)

64 sats \ 2 replies \ @jarolrod OP 6 May 2023

You already owning a device, and that being your node is bitcoin having a cost?

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @TonyGiorgio 6 May 2023

I already had a laptop too so I guess that was just free as well.

64 sats \ 0 replies \ @jarolrod OP 6 May 2023

your laptop wasn't free, but did you purchase the laptop for it to be a node? I assume not, you need devices in our world to work and to live. And those can also be a node. In that case, it's free to run a node and use bitcoin. There is no new added cost for you to run a node.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @jarolrod OP 6 May 2023

$80 phone btw https://twitter.com/GBKS/status/1648206373581094914?s=20

257 sats \ 1 reply \ @_b_o_n_e_s_ 6 May 2023

Thanks for raising awareness on an important issue and thanks for your work on Core 👍

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @jarolrod OP 6 May 2023

🫡

227 sats \ 2 replies \ @0260378aef 6 May 2023

This same logic could be applied to literally anything (it always costs something to do anything, at all).

However:

I actually really like this article, it's refreshing and thought-provoking, well written and at least somewhat original.
It's probably helpful to stop people with their endless tendency towards magical thinking, the "something for nothing" attitude. This thing (Bitcoin) demands a lot from you, if you want to directly interact with it.

But, perhaps the author's intent is really criticism; if so, then here's the response: base layer Bitcoin will never be a consumer payments technology. It fundamentally is not, and cannot be that.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @jarolrod OP 6 May 2023

Yeah this was mainly an amusing way for me to examine the direction we're going in with regards to tooling for non-technical people. Obviously base layer will not be where most transactions occur, but the steps required for someone to run it still needs to be low (and it is that way right now with core having a gui). For example, If someone wanted to setup their own Fedimint server, they need a bitcoin backend.

The ladder to the consumer tech layer can't be paywalled along the way :)

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @0260378aef 6 May 2023

It's not a "ladder" to a consumer payments tech layer. That would imply you need to traverse it to get there, but you don't. Not everyone has to have and run a node, in any meaningful sense. As you correctly point out in the article, that scenario is problematic and not realistic.

114 sats \ 1 reply \ @sudonaka 6 May 2023

As an illiterate pleb, thank you

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @jarolrod OP 6 May 2023

no, I thank you 🫡

84 sats \ 1 reply \ @Chep 6 May 2023

Proof of work in all areas of life. This is the way.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @sudonaka 6 May 2023

Disney hates Star Wars

30 sats \ 0 replies \ @jonatack 6 May 2023

deleted by author

20 sats \ 1 reply \ @felixduhaut 6 May 2023

The article is well written. It does assume that all wallets are based in a controlled jurisdiction

Also, if ofac censorship became the norm, I'm sure solutions will be created that make non custodial wallets easier to use.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @jarolrod OP 6 May 2023

We'd figure it out, and there are solutions already. But let's always keep this in mind :)