pull down to refresh
It was not this post in particular that triggered me, but his general posts over time, as well as the general attitude of a lot of certain Bitcoin Maxis that I've had to deal with over the last two years while trying to run my business.
There are actually a class of Bitcoiners who will refuse to use my service because it's not Bitcoin only. That's fine. Everyone can make their own decisions. But the argument that I'm trying to make about that attitude is that it is suicidal and only hurts Bitcoin in the end.
Some bitcoiners are relentless in their pursuit of purity, both in terms of Bitcoin and in privacy and technology, etc. They demand that I adopt every single new Bitcoin or privacy tech under the sun, and they get so distracted by this ideological perfectionism that they lose sight of the fact that the whole point of this is to make a good product and to solve real problems for real people.
I could have spent 90% percent of my time perfecting a Bitcoin‑only, privacy-perfect approach, but then I wouldn't be able to spend any time keeping up with all the latest and greatest AI developments that roll out daily.
Why did I post it from my company handle? Well, it's the only handle that I have on Nostr. Secondly, I actually believe in these arguments, and I want my company to wear this belief on its shoulder and lead by example.
There are actually a class of Bitcoiners who will refuse to use my service because it's not Bitcoin only. That's fine. Everyone can make their own decisions. But the argument that I'm trying to make about that attitude is that it is suicidal and only hurts Bitcoin in the end.
I don't see this as a case where they should be criticized for what they're doing, nor should companies like yours necessarily.
Purists are the intolerant minority that will make bitcoin-only projects viable much earlier than they otherwise would be. That yours isn't there (yet) isn't necessarily a knock. It might just be a sign of how early we are.
I would love it if one day I could move to a community where Bitcoin was the only thing that was accepted and that our little ecosystem could proliferate throughout the world. But that just hasn't materialized yet and thus it's not time for that yet. If you want to build a business that scales and becomes truly impactful, you have to cater to the existing audience of non-bitcoiners while still incentivizing Bitcoin.
As far as I'm concerned, we're rowing in the same direction.
What I want to emphasize, though, is that getting to that destination will require purity pressure. That some of us go out of our way, and pay more, to support bitcoin-only merchants, and withhold our support from those we think could be doing better, moves us towards the goal.
Like you say, the point is to incentivize bitcoin use.
Agree on all counts. Pressure Bitcoin adoption when one calculates that such pressure could result in something good for Bitcoin.
I feel that in some cases, the pressure is applied incorrectly and ends up hurting Bitcoin instead.
For example, when I wanted to make a post about PPQ in the Bitcoin Reddit, the mod refused to post because PPQ wasn't "Bitcoin only". However, when my Altcoin competitors want to post in a whole bunch of cryptocurrency reddits, they get huge encouragement and approval from those subreddits, gaining hundreds of real customers.
So I'm the good guy being "Bitcoin first" and yet it's never good enough for the some in Bitcoin community. Meanwhile, my competitors run laps around me in a marketing sense because the other communities are not as gated. Furthermore, those communities don't like the arrogance of some in the Bitcoin community and paint me that way as well, rejecting my posts in those subreddits as well.
This actually happened to me. I couldn't post in the /r/bitcoin reddit, nor could I post in the /r/cryptocurrency reddit. Hilarious self-own by Bitcoin purists.
I wonder though if the bitcoin-only moniker has much value left in it if - to ignorantly change Darth's words - the goalposts get shifted for many of these places over time.
This intolerant minority will feel abused and rightly so, because lets be honest now: they have been abused.
So as all these promises get broken there must be the logical next step of a mechanism for severe damage to those that abuse maxis. But it needs to be a precision scalpel: those that didn't make the promise need to stay out of shot.
Feeling betrayed is probably the worst feeling there is.
those that didn't make the promise need to stay out of shot.
Exactly. There's a huge difference between fiat companies moving towards bitcoin and bitcoin companies moving towards fiat.
You defend those who choose to conceal LN wallet status and those who chooose to minimise their use of LN while constantly virtue signalling that they are BTC Maxis 'living on The Bitcoin Standard'.
they just do disguised publicity for a crap service.
They think that if I entter into a debate with them will bring more attention (from others) to their crap shit.
THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.
Darth when I launched two years ago you came to my launch post and shit on it because "AI is bad" or something similar.
You can't conceive that you might be wrong sometimes.
Consistency matters.
AI is still bad.
And Darth is always right, because I speak up only when I know things,
Show us your SNs wallet history @DarthCoin and verify that you ever even buy CCs with sats- or that you never do and conversely sell CCs for sats - as you have previously admitted doing.
Consistency matters.
You claim to 'live on The Bitcoin Standard' but refuse to use LN here on Stacker News, preferring CC shitcoins because 'they always work'.
Your words and actions are demonstrably INCONSISTENT- that makes your a HYPOCRITE.
You never use sats here on Stacker News - you prefer CC shitcoins because 'they always work'.
You are promoting CC shitcoins.
You claim with zero verification to 'live on The Bitcoin Standard'.
What a virtue signalling verifiable hypocrite.
You have demonstrated many times you are incapable of reasoned debate and a good faith contest of ideas- you inevitably default to shoot the messenger trolling and concerted avoidance of any reasoned debate.
You cannot enter into a reasoned dialogue because your motives are malign and could be exposed for what they are if you ever engaged in genuine reasoned dialogue.
You live and speak in constant fear of and avoidance of the truth because you are not honest.
Aren't cowboy credits obtained by paying for them with bitcoin?
They can be but for content providers they can be exclusively obtained from zaps received.
@Darthcoin refuses to show his SNs wallet history to show whether he ever buys CCs with sats but even if he did he is still only using CCs while transacting with other people here and so is never using the LN while making or receiving payments within SNs.
This is surely a massive hypocrisy for someone who endlessly virtue signals that he is 'living on The Bitcoin Standard'.
Even if you are buying CCs with sats because you spend more than you earn then you are still absolutely minimising your use of LN and sats here on SNs.
Show us your SNs wallet history @DarthCoin and verify that you ever buy CCs with sats- or that you never do and conversely sell CCs for sats - as you have previously admitted doing.
@DarthCoin arsemilking hypocrit extraordinaire.
Hm... If he is buying CCs, he must use the lightning network.
Are poaters in a forum really "content creators"? Am i a content creator by writing this post?
If you are buying CCs with sats because you spend more than you earn then you are absolutely minimising your use of LN and sats here on SNs.
Show us your SNs wallet history @DarthCoin and verify that you ever even buy CCs with sats- or that you never do and conversely sell CCs for sats - as you have previously admitted doing.
'Am i a content creator by writing this post?
You sound like a @DarthCoin sock puppet apologist bot incapable of reasoned sequential dialogue- programmed to avoid it at any costs.
Apologist bot sock puppet? I really don't think you would be attacking me personaly in real life.
And not that you care, but what I said is actually valid engagement in "sequential dialog".
[meta alert]Yo, I wonder something kinda meta: why are you triggered by this to a point that you publish a reply from your company account? You run a prepaid service (awesome[1]) that has since as far as my memory goes back always incentivized using LN. You're not a wallet - just like SN isn't a wallet - so why do you and your company feel so strongly about what Darth says about wallet purity? Why enter this fight? Is this a hill to die on?
You have an awesome service. I use it because you provide a really great range of LLMs that serve me in testing things out. I recommend your service to people and I also recommend them to use LN and take the 5% discount. ↩