pull down to refresh
Did Bitcoin need Taproot? Did it need SegWit?
So that's your argument ? It needed those so it must need DC ?
Nope, you are using this “purity” argument and i am showing you that you are using different standards for recent changes so you have no historical precedence.
When it comes to importance DC proponents see that as change that could actually reduce number of future updates so it is leaning more of your conservative approach to upgrade policy.
Every change has come with unforeseen consequences, leading many to become more and more conservative. Past changes have increased conservatism in Bitcoin.
I also did not say whether Bitcoin needed Taproot/SegWit or not. You are saying it did, not me.
I am just asking. I think it is great those made it through. Certainly it helped LN a lot.
Problem i see is that you approach Bitcoin as something that was given by god and people will therefor automatically adopt it. No, people will adopt something that supports their usecases and it is up to us (people involved in the process) to steer it toward values of decentralization, scarcity, …
Bitcoin isn't broken and doesn't need any fixing
Counterpoint: bitcoin isn't perfect and could use improving
There are more reasons to do an upgrade than "the current version is broken"
If better sidechains improve bitcoin then I want that
Because I want bitcoin to be the best money
Your entire reasoning is backwards and against bitcoin ethos. You should be against any change as long as you haven't seen any good arguments pro. Bitcoin isn't broken and doesn't need any fixing.
"Competitive market environment". You talk like an ETH talking head. Bitcoin is money. Almost all other coins (except Monero) are corporate tokens.