@oomahq@murchandamus I'm perceptive to all info, I just think you are on the wrong side and have lost your mind over something inconsequential.
So I'm leaving it here, muted until the fork fails to activate and you guys have to propose an emergency difficulty adjustment to "keep Bitcoin alive".
That was just a gotcha question, in sincerely don't care how much hashrate you have as it is inconsequential and I've already put this discussion in its wooden pajamas.
You are arguing in circles and moving the goalpost in order to keep a narrative, years of data don't matter when one I'd blinded by ideology.
So I won't engage anymore. Good luck.
Kind of hard for Zcash shills to spread fear about a quantum computer hacking Bitcoin keys when they just had a catastrophically bad inflation bug (again).
BTC is dead to me.
For the first time since 2014, when my usual “should I buy BTC?” friends came for their scheduled emotional support hotline, I told them no.
I am confident there is no longer a trade in BTC because the original trade is gone.
BTC was the first memecoin.
Do not waste time @'ing me, to me it is obvious.
As you all know, every great memecoin needs a narrative powerful enough to make people believe they are doing something more meaningful than buying an asset from someone else. BTC had the best narrative of all time.
Rebellion against inflation, fiat, banks, central banks, and the establishment.
That was the narrative. But what mattered more was the raw engine underneath it: ESCAPE.
BTC gave ordinary people the first internet native asset that could plausibly let them escape the rat race without needing access to the incumbent class. Before BTC, immense wealth creation was mostly gated by proximity. You needed access to early equity, private deals, high finance, institutional networks, valuable real estate, or some other lane controlled by people already inside the system (Boomers). BTC changed that because anyone online could buy the asset before the ruling class.
That was BTC’s trade and its monopoly.
It gave ordinary people a way to escape the rat race by opting out of a system that had kept access, upside, and wealth creation mostly in the hands of the incumbent class.
The rebellion was the story -> The escape was the trade -> The monopoly was being the only asset online that could credibly offer both.
That monopoly no longer exists.
The irony is that BTC created the blueprint for the world that made BTC less important. It taught the internet that an asset did not need traditional fundamentals if it had belief, liquidity, attention, narrative, and enough people willing to treat the trade as a way out.
Financial nihilism + magic internet money.
That is the blueprint BTC gave the world. Forget fundamentals. Trade the narrative. Coordinate online. Let the greater fool mechanism create wealth for the people who arrived early enough.
Think about it......Since BTC, every market has been hyper gamblified. Stocks trade like memes. Coins trade like memes. AI tokens trade like memes. Prediction markets trade like memes. Anything that lives on the internet can become a trade, a belief system, and a possible escape hatch from the rat race.
BTC was powerful when it was the only internet asset that gave outsiders a credible way to get rich before the establishment arrived. Now the internet creates that setup constantly.
BTC also lost the rebellion narrative. Institutional adoption killed that part of the story. The asset that started as a way to opt out of the system is now owned through ETFs, marketed by asset managers, held by corporate treasuries, and represented culturally by Saylor running a balance sheet strategy.
BTC lost the 2 things that made it matter.
It lost the rebellion because the establishment absorbed it.
It lost the escape monopoly because every internet asset now competes to become the next rat race exit.
The store of value story was always secondary. The inflation hedge story was always secondary. The hard money story was always secondary. The main function was escape.
BTC was the first trade that made outsiders believe they could beat the system from outside the system.
Now that function lives everywhere.
To all the BTC maxis, with love.
-XY
El sumario conocido hoy del caso Leire revela una suma de comportamientos intolerables de personas que utilizaron en falso y en vano el nombre del PSOE para beneficiarse o defender oscuros intereses.
El PSOE seguirá colaborando plenamente con la justicia para que se esclarezcan todos los hechos.
Que nadie tenga ninguna duda de la transparencia, honorabilidad y los valores de este partido.
@oomahq@murchandamus > Spam is fought with mempool policies
> BIP-110 is a community effort to revert a malicious policy change
So which one is it? Policy of consensus?
@boyacaxa@benthecarman@SuperTestnet@callebtc@sethforprivacy Users say what matter to them.
People using Spark because the UX is just as good as setting and forgetting and not having to be online in order to receive or for the find to still be there shows that good UX matters.
I always get tagged into this kind of stuff, so I'll bite:
1. an embebed node is the worst possible UX right after a cloud node, you can't just move to another wallet or have the same wallet in simultaneous devices because the node closes, long connection times, no offline receive on top of all the LN UX downsides we all know and love (reason nobody outside Bitcoiners care to use LN).
2. LSPs have the ability to know exactly when and what movements you make as they are your only endpoint to the rest of the network, even is the channel is private and it is not exposed to gossip, they know your exact balance and what movements have you made as you have to go through them in order to move, so you are stuck with a promise that they are not collecting your info, best they can do to mitigate it is client side routing, where they don't calculate the routes (props to Zeus for this) but you still have the endpoint know your liquidity, how much you receive, how much you send, and how much do you close your channel with.
3. Lamentably nothing that has been talked in this thread really matters to the end users, all they care are 2 things:
- the Bitcoin being in their control. (Doesn't matter if that requieres trust as long as they don't have to wait for payment approval, ask yourself why WoS has been the most popular LN wallet for years despite being custodial before Spark)
- Easy UX, literally nobody cares about the many moving parts of a LN node, only we, the hardcore bitcoiners do and well know it is horrible UX.
4. Privacy is a spectrum, not everyone cares about the same things, if you are a privacy advocate who is looking for total anonymity, go use Monero via an encrypted wireguard connection to a node you yourself run in the middle of nowhere connected to the internet via Starlink. If you just want to use LN easily just use Spark, or Arkade or Second, knowing what they offer against other alternatives.
Another EVM contract hacked this week.
Bitcoin-native contracts don't break the same way.
Huge opportunity for developers to build better protocols on solid foundations
Tú puedes elegir a que nodos conectarte y splitstream existe ya así que no te hace falta ni siquiera conectarte directamente, cosa que ya mencioné en esta misma conversación.
Es Adam Back el mismo que dice que el tamaño de bloques y el propio PoW es la mitigación, siempre lo ha sido y siempre lo será.
No sigo esta conversación, no pienso seguir dando vueltas en círculos. Mucha suerte con la desinformación que te has tragado y fork en que lo más seguro es que pierdas tus ahorros si lo sigues.