pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 10 replies \ @random_ 2 Sep 2023 \ parent \ on: The Case for a Chain Split bitcoin
Bitcoin Dominance is up from 41% to 49% YTD.
Huh?
Zoom out.
Dont live in the denial, there are interesting features that are either completely missing or are complicating effective implementations (eg LN).
Those missing primitives are missing not because of Satoshi’s grant plan but because his lack of knowledge, state of the art, missing industry experience. I am 100% sure if Satoshi has second chance to create bitcoin it would look very different.
reply
It's clear you do not know what you are talking about.
A new, anonymous, account manufacturing support for a change to Bitcoin. Even in the face of contradictory evidence. Your interests and your imagination mean nothing to me.
reply
I actually do but ok. Iq80s wont stop this since most of them cant even run their nodes.
reply
That's adorable. Time will tell.
reply
there are interesting features that are either completely missing
A feature being interesting is not a sufficient reason to add it to any program. The feature must contribute to the purpose of the program beyond what the feature costs to implement/maintain. Bitcoin's purpose is very narrow, which is why Satoshi didn't include other interesting features (e.g. a Turing-complete scripting language).
There are plenty of altcoins that provide those interesting features. They work right now and a lot of people are using them.
reply
So you think that having Satoshi had a second chance and equiped with all today’s knowledge he would built Bitcoin as it is now?
reply
He certainly would have made a few changes (i.e. to avoid bugs like the 2011 inflation bug) and he may or may not have made other changes (e.g. smaller blocks).
But his goal of ending monetary inflation would have remained the same. Considering inflation has gotten significantly worse since 2009, Satoshi probably would have been even more adamant that Bitcoin was made to end inflation.
Fortunately, there are plenty of Bitcoiners who have been adamant about that specific goal.
reply
I agree that the core features like fixed supply, pow, high decentralization (aka small rather than large blocks) would stay. Yet lower level features that would enable scaling on other layers are missing (zk, ctv, trustless sidechains, …)
reply
Missing industry experience lmao
reply
In 2008/9 there was not much decentralized digital currency industry to exprience
reply