Thread

Zero-JS Hypermedia Browser

Relays: 5
Replies: 3
Generated: 00:10:12
Argument: "if you want an opinion you need to fund core devs directly" Counter: "a lot of us donate to core devs, & we are the lifeblood of the protocol maybe our feedback is valuable" "If our voices are not heard maybe we'll be forced to redirect our efforts" There's nothing wrong with my perspective. There's nothing wrong with adversarial conversations.
2025-05-10 19:28:40 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 2 replies ↓
Login to reply

Replies (3)

is there a point being made here? You are just describing market activity. by all means go pay knots contributors if you think it will create a more censorship resistant bitcoin. How are you so sure you are smarter than a large number of core devs who think adversarially every day, to ensure incentives are aligned so that filters don’t inadvertently create more and more slipstreams, completely breaking bitcoins censorship resistance properties? They are thinking at a different level than simply 80iq monkey jpg memes which don’t make any sense. But by all means if you would be rather manipulated by memes instead of technical arguments, then continue to harrass devs, spam memes, and support unhinged developers instead of supporting reasonable discourse on mailing lists, where this stuff is supposed to be resolved. Maybe have some self reflection and realize this discourse is overall hurting bitcoin more than it is helping.
2025-05-10 19:48:35 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 1 replies ↓ Reply
Your attitude is just as childish as the other side of this argument. My PoV on this has nothing to do with the specifics of this exact change to Bitcoin...and everything to do with the attitudes of the core devs. We are allowed to question you, you should have better responses that don't include crying about adversaries ripping you on the internet.
2025-05-10 20:00:22 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 1 replies ↓ Reply