Much of the discussion surrounding Bitcoin in the past year has focused on how to use it. Or how to use it. The whole Ordinals/Inscriptions craze of the past year has created a group of bitcoiners who, like children, shout about how other users decide to use their bitcoins.
This is completely disconnected and divorced from the entire design philosophy of Bitcoin in the first place: to be an open access permissionless system. To be something Do not stop using. Outside of the developer community, most of the “tech talk” of the past year has focused on technical mechanisms. Stop other Bitcoin users from using Bitcoin.
It amazes me that so many people in this space have made such changes, which ultimately cannot be done without destroying the use of Bitcoin, that they have arbitrarily put on the “approved” list. This is crazy. Bitcoiners are actively trying to figure out how to censor other bitcoiners because they don’t like the way they use Bitcoin.
There are two main rationalizations for this. 1) Posts are hurting people’s ability to download new full nodes. This is not true, the bottleneck in the initial synchronization of nodes is not the bandwidth (where the records have a small increase in the required data), it is the verification of the data. No need to check records. The more records there are, the lower the verification costs, because nodes simply download it and don’t check anything related to the record data when verifying those transactions. 2) Increase these fees. Fee increases are inevitable and a result of finite block caps.
Here’s what Satoshi said in 2010 to a person who complained about fees:
“A transaction fee only occurs when you are sending a really large transaction, and even then it works out to only 0.002% of the amount. It’s not money sucked out of the system, it just goes to other networks. If you’re upset about paying the fee, you can always turn the tables and run the node yourself, and maybe someday scratch the 0.44 fee yourself.”
These arguments are simply broken and completely meaningless. If you can stop someone from using Bitcoin, then Bitcoin has failed in its core value proposition. There is nothing to regulate the use of Bitcoin, other than economic pressure from fees to make it work in practice. If anything else prevents the system from being used, it won’t work. It cannot withstand censorship. This failed.
People who are frustrated by the appearance of use cases that affect them should do something productive, like focus on how to adapt their own use case so that it still works well in front of people who use Bitcoin for other purposes.
Instead, many Bitcoiners are crying mom and dad to stop the bad guys from using Bitcoin. It’s sad that there is still some level of argument in this conversation. This is also one of the factors that contributed to the improvement of Bitcoin possible adapt their use cases to work properly when others are down.
Grow up and stop whining about what other people are doing with their property and focus instead on how to do what you want with your property.
This article is a Take it. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.
Source link
[og_img]
