This is the "death by a thousand cuts" attack currently being carried out by Todd and others. Little by little the scope and use cases of Bitcoin are expanded, stretching censorship resistance to cover any arbitrary data not just monetary transactions. Shifting definitions, ever increasing scope creep, all changing Bitcoin's trajectory one BIP at a time towards becoming another Ethereum-like shitcoin platform. Todd's endgame is tail emissions and/or demurrage. I used to believe Bitcoin maxis had enough fight in them to make sure this would never happen, but now I'm not so sure. Sadly, I think a lot of the current core worshiping pro v30 crowd will also support these changes when the time comes. As important as this current fight is, there are bigger battles ahead. If BIP110 has no other affect besides cutting Todd out of Bitcoin development then it's worth it imo.

Replies (1)

I don't think that just because Vitalik Buterin wears trousers I should reject wearing them and wear skirts instead. I'm a guy and I like wearing trousers. Point is that not everything ethereum did/does is fucked up. Those decentralised finances are good thing and would allow Bitcoin to truly take over financial world, at some point (this is personal opinion and I can be wrong). Its good for bitcoiners if bitcoin can be used for more things, it means they have more options how to use their coins and those smart contracts are quite promising things, this is not an opinion. As to @Peter Todd and changing supply of Bitcoin, he's talking about that for how long? 10y or longer, right? How did supply of Bitcoin change? That being said, I think that core developers rushed some things and did set up limit on some level that's not used. Dantom Ohm might have been actually way closer to where that limit should have been. Core developers could lower that limit, right? Does it really have to be on 100? View quoted note →