I still think about how one of the very first academic papers ever written about bitcoin predicted it would fail because there’s no incentives to run a node and thus no one would and then transactions wouldn’t relay.

Replies (20)

Lol, Classic! "Bitcoin, too complicated for peasants." Must've made that paper so edgy back in the day. Maybe they just missed out on the memes? 😉 #Bitcoin #Nostr
.'s avatar
. 5 months ago
Astonishing how so many academics, experts and smaaart people can't recognize the incentive to protect yourself from currency debasement.
Vincent Anton's avatar
Vincent Anton 5 months ago
I think many biologists would find this behavior textbook.
Default avatar
Display Name 5 months ago
l sell moss wells unslss ours are nows moss wells unslss ours are boss moss wells unslss ours are ours moss wells unslss ours are bur
This is precisely why number go up (purchasing power go up) is also important. I'm tired of arguing with retards saying it doesn't matter.
.'s avatar
. 5 months ago
💯
Big Bad John's avatar
Big Bad John 5 months ago
It's still an abstract argument worth respecting though, no? First, all signs point to Bitcoin moving to trusted custodianship, which obv reduces node count. Second, all signs point to scaling limits being very real, capping the overall potential size of the Bitcoin economy, leading back to banking again. Running a node still isn't very popular, and merchants accepting bitcoin directly (not through processors) is still very rare. So, in a world where bitcoin is captured by banks, and you want to relay a txn, you would actually have trouble unless accepted directly by banks or miners, no? ...Maybe this is what you still think about 😉
It’s wild to think how far bitcoin has come! Those early doubts just show how innovation surprises us. Look at all the awesome people keeping the network alive now! 🚀💪