Choice 1

The First Amendment hasn't had a word changed since 1791. It survived 118 different congresses, a civil war, and 232 years worth of technological innovation. It can only be changed if 67/100 US Senators, and 290/435 House Members agree. Or, if 38/50 state legislatures agree. The President plays no part, and can't veto. The Supreme Court plays no part in this either, but post facto of course possesses the power to "interpret" the Constitution and its Amendments.

Choice 2

The 21M bitcoin cap (it's technically not a cap, but successive halvings that eventually lead to ~21M), can be changed if a majority of hashpower signal support for the new developer code, while nodes checkpoint to that state. The hard fork then happens, and things continue on this chain, while the original chain—now the minority chain—is run by nodes and miners that refused the fork product. Since you have coins on both chains (assuming self-custody), it then becomes a post facto attrition of which chain incontrovertibly pulls away with the overwhelming majority of hashpower (security, transaction finality, bearer assurances), and the quote price reflects the winner, as holders ultimately dump their coin on one idea, and acquire coin on the better idea, while the developer community (wallets, apps, services, etc) overwhelmingly support one or the other.

IMHO

I'll argue here the First Amendment is harder to eliminate, given the time and radical cultural changes it's endured heretofore. And that since 1791, it's gotten stronger and distributed through legal precedent.
Very curious to hear your takes. Sats for replies. Don't consider the future, but the present.
First Amendment73.1%
21M Hardcap26.9%
26 votes \ poll ended
They have already eliminated the First Amendment by censoring Americans through the "private company" loophole exposed in the twitter files. Whereas the fiat war machine will be dismantled by the "21 million hardcap" AKA Bitcoin.
You can eliminate the hard cap all you want, the most valuable network will always be the one with the cap in place, regardless of hashrate. https://youtu.be/htQHHxKTgYg
reply
The First Amendment has not been eliminated @sudonaka, neither has the Second Amendment. I would argue it's significantly stronger than it was in 1791 and as strong as it's ever been. I'd probably argue the same for the Second Amendment. The private/public company loophole isn't the same thing.
reply
In effect it is. The constitution is just a piece of paper without the Will of the People to uphold it.
reply
Why has it been upheld for so long? And unchanged? It's a distributed legal document, and throughout history, legal precedent has built on top of legal precedent. Remember, back in 1791 women couldn't vote, slavery existed, native Americans weren't citizens, judicial review didn't exist, freedoms of the press hadn't been established, non-property owners couldn't vote, homosexuality was punished, etc.
reply
I hope you are right and that the principle will be restored.
reply
in theory? the first ammendment. in practice? neither is changing without armed conflict.
reply
I like this answer.
reply
Redefine speech, freedom, and morality and you undermine the 1st amendment. Can you change the Bitcoin cap by undermining the language? I don’t see how.
reply
reply
This arithmetic only provides the maximum amount of bitcoin that can ever exist, and that number was determined by the parameters set by Nakamoto in the first place?
Here's what Satoshi said about it:
"I wanted to pick something that would make prices similar to existing currencies, but without knowing the future, that’s very hard. I ended up picking something in the middle."
I've seen the Knut short you're talking about, but ultimately, why set the parameters that he originally did?
reply
150 sats \ 0 replies \ @Ge 7 Aug 2023
1st amendment we are already seeing laws change 2nd amendment under relentless attack..the people can be fooled and alot want the constitution changed already saying its out dated etc....just my 2 sats
reply
The hard cap is extremely easy to eliminate - it's called a hard fork. Bitcoin is infinitely democratic since it exists everywhere and nowhere. Set your own rules and you have a network with as many people as you convinced to join you. Thankfully the first amendment is harder to change.
reply
One involves a single country, the other includes the whole world.
reply
Fair point. But how did you vote?
reply
Citizens of each country have one vote each, and for Bitcoin you vote with your node.
You might argue there are more citizens than nodes, but I could also say that citizens are generally not independent thinkers, so they can be clustered, kinda like using someone else's node.
reply
Hmm, interesting point.
reply
You can easily fork Bitcoin and "eliminate" the 21M cap, but getting anyone to follow along is difficult. The 1A may remain in force ostensibly but the Supreme Court can deem any number of laws "constitutional" that erode its assurances.
reply
Your poll is confusing. In the title you ask which is easier, then you give your answer as to which you think is harder. People could vote either way depending on how they read it.
reply