pull down to refresh
107 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined 4 Oct \ parent \ on: Bitcoin Faces Its 1913 Moment bitcoin
I think it’s that the two sides trying to save the gold standard actually had other motives and it would have been better to just stick with the gold standard as it was.
Like @justin_shocknet has been saying, not updating your node software is an option.
Aye, it's really the only option (maybe others like BTCD or Libbitcoin since they're not in positions to be nudging anything)
I have to dismiss Knots v Core takes like the article because they're inherently ignorant of the fact that, just like the gold example, Knots and Core are the same (wrong) side... Which is not monetary maximalism, but application stack maximalism.
The only way to prevent that from happening is so many economic nodes rejecting application blocks that miners start to feel the burn of incentives. That means rejecting "enhancement" of something that already works.
Bitcoin is by design not a technical system, but an incentive one.
reply
This is why I am addicted to stacker news
reply
That's what I got from it too, after having to read it three times.
reply
I think it’s that the two sides trying to save the gold standard actually had other motives and it would have been better to just stick with the gold standard as it was.
I don't really understand it - and am happy to be corrected - but I think garbled circuits may change what is possible even if bitcoin stuck to its "gold standard".
reply