pull down to refresh
123 sats \ 4 replies \ @Louferlou 26 Oct 2023 \ on: Bitcoin maximalists: Do you believe that competition leads to quality? bitcoin
Bitcoin maximalists are, for the most part, libertarians who believe in the free market and thus, competition. That is not the issue here. The issue is that some other "projects" are misleading in their marketing strategies and use Bitcoin to advertise their shoddy operations and get-rich-quick schemes.
Furthermore, as just mentioned, maxis are pro-free market individuals in a battle with nation-states, aiming to create a free world without overlords, and where private property is the default. They are not here to experiment with science projects or to "try things." They aim to fix the world. While mainstream normies may mock these idealists, the fact remains that they are deeply passionate, and they can be quite blunt when confronted by those with differing ideals.
Consequently, they are often interested in Austrian economics, which presents a compelling view of what good money should be – and what it shouldn't be. This high level of conviction, perhaps also rooted in a more robust understanding of sound economic principles, makes maxis somewhat irritated when people repeatedly present a "better Bitcoin." The primary use case for all of this is simple: storing and sending an immutable and scarce digital asset without needing permission. And this goal is far from being fully realized.
In essence, anything outside of this core objective is, at best, a distraction (like Monero) and, at worst, a marketed attack on Bitcoin (like Ethereum). But of course, Bitcoiners value competition, which seems obvious to me.
How is Monero a distraction?
It is providing something not only that Bitcoin can't, but also refuses to. Strong default privacy, real world fungibility, and very cheap tx fees.
All without sacrificing custody, permissionlessness, final settlement, and p2p on some L2/3 and all the unique tradeoffs that comes with
It's like getting mad that people need a hammer for something and you think they should be able to use a screwdriver for everything.
reply
I agree that Ethereum, Proof of Stake, is garbage. I am libertarian (though leaning lately towards seeing some benefits of state in my country, sweden, which do not apply elsewhere). In what way are other PoW open source coins get rich quick scams? Why discard them all by principle? Who benefits from this? The people who are the thought leaders that made you think like this. They benefit nicely. Your benefit is blindness: because, really, how inclined are you to read the documentation of monero or litecoin or anything else? That knowledge would be beneficial for bitcoin, wouldn't it.
They are not here to experiment with science projects or to "try things." They aim to fix the world.
You have described a totalitarian mindset. Not libertarian. Fix the world? Great. Not allowing anyone else to fix the world? Totalitarian. Thomas sowell calls this mindset "the intelligencia". The people who are kind enough to use their great intelligence to help to foolish commoners/shitcoiners. Never seen intelligencia in rightwing people before, but it's extremely common on the left.
I have read Human Action, so I'm at least in part probably aware of what you mean by your statement about Austrian economics. The price or "value" of a thing is determined only by what the market you are in, is willing to pay for it. Bitcoin is valuable because it is expensive.
Bitcoiners value competition
Agreed. Bitcoin maximalists, however, value bitcoin. They don't want competition. Again, how much do you care about the fascinating workings of Monero? Or even more advanced coins? Maximalists don't want competition, they want to sit on a hill together and be good friends. Every other coin will compete, so which coin will become better in the long run?
reply
Ethereum had issues long before switching to PoS, if that answers part of your question. Thus, PoS is not the only problem in this specific case.
In principle, any compromises regarding the core value of Bitcoin (as perceived mostly by Austrians) are a waste of time. There's no "I'm libertarian BUT I like the violence of the State sometimes" here.
And there is nothing totalitarian in the "If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry" mindset.
Everyone is welcome to try to fix the world, but please allow people the freedom to disagree on the best approach, will you?
More advanced meaning ?
You are totally wrong maxis don't care about competitors (even if it's not totally true as Monero's ethos is appreciated I believe), which is really different of not wanting it. Again, maximalists are truly pro free market. There is absolutely no problem with Monero surpassing Bitcoin in the future. Maximalists are focused on addressing the money issue and don't want distractions while doing so. If you want to explore a "better" or "more advanced" option, good for you, but that's not the vision of those you label as maximalists, that's all.
Honestly, it seems to me that you are the intelligencia who'd like that everybody sit on a hill to be good friends. Just let people disagree, why do you care so much ?
reply
why do you care so much
I care because the maximalist ideology is a cult in the exact same sense that jihadism is a cult. If you saw your compatriots start joining ISIS, would you not try to understand why? And if you found that a shared trait of many of those who joined, was a single person, someone who riles them up and makes money off it? Yeah I care.
Again, maximalists are truly pro free market. There is absolutely no problem with Monero surpassing Bitcoin in the future.
Your friend group, which kicks you out if you don't value and speculate on the same commodity as them, these are people you would classify as being of an Austrian mindset? A group which not only discourages the free market of ideas internally (do they not discuss monero because they "don't care", or is it because they fear being outcasts?), but also actively use trolling, "toxicity", and confidence tricks, in order to discourage other bitcoiners to stop talking or thinking about the value of other things?
You believe/propound that you know the price of all crypto that is not bitcoin. Maximalists believe the "objective value" of any shitcoin is zero. This is not Austrian. It is literally marxist.
I understand that you want a world without overlord regulators (as I do), and you believe the ends justify the means. But, as an Austrian like you must understand, more perspective means more vision. Your movement hurts crypto.
They [maximalists] are not here to experiment with science projects or to "try things." They aim to fix the world.
Again, if your cult kicks you out for experimenting, dismisses you as a "fly eating shit", because they know the truth already. This you describe as libertarian? Your argument that I'm imposing on you for questioning your group- is fundamentally different from your group discouraging questions in you. You are not free to find new perspectives, you must all share the same valuation of bitcoin and of all other currency, therefore your collective intelligence is exactly equal to the thought leader that has most influence among you. I'm sure there's no incentives for that person to act maliciously..
In principle, any compromises regarding the core value of Bitcoin (as perceived mostly by Austrians) are a waste of time.
I agree. Blockchains with "less environmentally wasteful" algorithms, or "smart contracts", that's not interesting to me either. They're bullshit.
But litecoin is exactly like bitcoin except it is more resistant to centralization. Disregarding litecoin, encouraging others to disregard it, is therefore compromising the core value of bitcoin: A decentralized, trustless, peer to peer ledger.
There's no "I'm libertarian BUT I like the violence of the State sometimes"
I agree with this as well, it's certainly a great cognitive dissonance for me to have such feelings, as a lifelong anarchist. But, to give some context, Sweden (Scandinavia) is not like other places.
Are you libertarian in dealing with your family? E.g. if your little brother is retarded, do you let him die because you father forces you to pay "taxes" and help him survive? No. But not because of refusal to subordinate to an authority, only because you like your brother, and trust your father. Scandinavia has the most tightly coupled social cohesion of any place I've been to (lived 2 years in the US, a few months in south america, a while in china).
In a real sense, Scandinavians are siblings, whereas the greater country (imo) called USA, the people are more like cousins. So if I ever get to move to America, I will again be full libertarian.
I've had my house raided by police, and I know it can happen any time, I can't defend myself (no right to bear arms here!). I'm not happy about that. But I've stopped considering myself anarchist. End of political rant that is maybe not so interesting to you :)
Honestly, it seems to me that you are the intelligencia who'd like that everybody sit on a hill to be good friends
Of course I want that, I want every single bitcoin enthusiast to hang out and talk and solve shit. When I said "hill" though, I meant it as an analogy to not wanting to interact with other crypto enthusiasts. I want to hear their perspectives as well. Because more perspective, is more vision. And the central bankers, our common enemy, are not weak.
reply