408 sats \ 3 replies \ @orthwyrm 22 May 2023 \ on: Do you use the term Bitcoin Maximalist to describe yourself? bitcoin
Vitalik's original definition is fair:
Unfortunately "maxi" has since come to be associated with the lowest common denominator on Twitter, and is mostly a stereotype peddled by influencers manufacturing drama for engagement.
Due to this baggage I don't find the term helpful and so avoid using it.
there's nothing fair about the definition of that pseudointellectual snake. Here's my two cents:
-
There's nothing wrong with launching another coin, what is wrong is using deceptive tactics to misrepresent our technically inferior shitcoin as something that can even compete with Bitcoin.
-
He framed it makes it sound that Bitcoin Maximalists are anti-free market monopolists, which is absolutely not the case. The very basis of maximalism rests on Bitcoin being technically sound and ethical solution, not on anti-competition.
-
What's more, the basic premise of maximalism can also be seen in terms of proof-of-work: you can only obtain coins by providing energy/work (in exchange for valuable goods and services or PoW). The idea of issuing coins without PoW equals forgery and is not ethically acceptable.
There are so many snakes shitting on maximalism these days that people start to forget what's actually underneath it. The fiat/shitcoin brain rot is real.
reply
There's nothing wrong with launching another coin
Wrong. Please listen what Bank for International Settlements is telling you:
"Fragmentation means that (...) [Bitcoin] cannot fulfil the social role of money" (source)
reply
How did you type out exactly what I was thinking?
reply