pull down to refresh
10 sats \ 2 replies \ @south_korea_ln 1 Nov \ on: I want to talk about the Blocksize Wars bitcoin
Don't give too much credit to the creature. The creature only got interested in this when they realised there was money to be made. If the market had decided BCH to be the real bitcoin, they would have come for BCH. Wall street coming in was bound to happen. Only BTC has value to that's where they're at. The only thing to do is to make sure BTC keeps its core values and increase it's adoption in daily life beyond the NGU obsession, the etfs and Michael saylors of the world. No need to think about the past, only thing to do is think about the present. Even if BCH were to be right about BTC being captured, reversing the outcome of the blockwars is pointless. BCH is a thing of the past. Focus on BTC to make sure the creature is just a participant in it and not its leader. As long as you can use BTC without anyone telling you when and how to do it, BTC is doing what it's supposed to do. Who cares if wall street is playing games with it. It does not affect you. They don't have control over your coins.
In Roger's book, he claims that their first goal was to prevent Bitcoin from gaining too much traction before they could counter with their own digital money movements such as Venmo. It was a 2 part plan to ensure Bitcoin adoption didn't take off, while increasing the ability to use fiat digitally and seamlessly.
Part 1, ramp up the ability to send fiat money over phone apps. Remove the friction to send fiat.
Part 2, stop the institutional usage of Bitcoin as a way to move money, at least until they've finished development of Part 1.
Ultimately, this doesn't matter, and I think that's your point. Who cares about the details... BTC wins in every scenario, right?
The problem comes in when it becomes clear that they succeeded. Perhaps without their influence, the community would have figured out a better solution. For example, a small block size increase, followed by a long term L2 plan. Lightning with 6MB blocks would probably be the perfect risk/reward play. But LN on 2MB is tough.
I'm playing devil's advocate, though. I don't think any of us can decide to increase the blocksize. That's the whole point.... who has the power to decide? No one, and that's what makes Bitcoin special.
However, I think it's probably true that Satoshi did not mean to keep the 1MB block size. He hoped we would increase it. Increasing it around 2016 would have been perfect to help maintain momentum of adoption. Ossifying after that, and moving to layer 2's would be the correct choice. I'm afraid the central banks applied their influence to ensure we never increased the block size..... especially when they didn't have their shit, like Venmo, in place yet.
reply