Login to reply
Replies (138)
Freedom has no governance
There it is
He is a plonker it seems
Do you think he is right or wrong for potentially altering the course of that major company funding? I don’t know why I phrased it like this…. As of everyone doesn’t know what he is talking about.
he makes really good arguments against the stupid strawman he presented. Top notch. Back to the regular programming...
BITCOIN IS TRUTH
💯
So he did do it
There is the source
🤣
Plonker? More like twunt.
Total cunt 💯🫂 I agree
Are we so naive to think the block size wars will be the first time rich people think they have more control or influence than exists in reality? Saylor is lost, and maybe captured. But Bitcoin doesn't care. Tick tock, next block.
✨✨✨⚡👏👏
🥱🥱🥱
What’s a plonker
Means moron, but a nice way of saying it 🫂
Thanks 😊
MAYBE YOU SHOULD RUN A NODE MICHAEL.
I would say it is “who” is funding you. Last year everyone would’ve wanted P. Diddy to fund them. Not so much anymore. The Piper always comes calling and someone will have to pay.
The difference here is that we know that this big company is up to no good already.
He runs a node and has miners. Lol
🫂🫂🫂🫂
Use the give a shit matrix
I hear ya. We all have choices to make. There is always someone willing to make that sacrifice and “they” know this to be true. So “they” live on.
Feels cherry picked for outrage bait. Still not going to watch another full 2 hours of Saylor for the full context.
True that
Fear-mongering spin?
The infrustracture for the world's economy shouldn't be built by those just looking to capture it so they can recreate the gold standard on digital rails and sit on top of the world as the ultimate gatekeepers of humanity's future.
Need an actual dev to ask him this question. Someone who might to not ask a strawman question leading him to provide a strawman answer.
New category of people: "actual devs".
As opposed to, you know, just "devs".
Somebody point out at what time of the pod they begin this discussion.
I can’t listen to Saylor for more than couple of minutes at a time
Honestly don't know what to think about it.
I love Odell and the whole team ' (Opensats, HRF etc) dedication to support this space which is admirable, but can't we hear his point of view ?
Can't he be concerned by the "who" is funding Bitcoin development ?
PS: I'm probably missing a lot of inputs on this specific issue but so far, I'm not so sure that he is the bad guy some people say he is. He is just playing his 4D chess game as a big regulated public company. But I still think he is on our side overall.
We don't have to "slay all of our heroes" just because it's possible to do so when we disagree
YES
No strings attached grants are ungoverned, no?
Or do they tell developers what to do?
He literally just admitted that he told walk street firms to not fund bitcoin development
OPENSATS FUNDS DEVS BASED ON THEIR PROOF OF WORK ON OPEN SYSTEMS.
WE HAVE PROVIDED OVER 120 GRANTS. NONE OF THEM ARE WORKING ON “SHITCOINS ON BITCOIN.”
IRONICALLY SAYLOR’S OWN IDENTITY PROJECT RELIES ON INSCRIPTIONS.
GRANT RECIPIENTS PROVIDE QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORTS TO THE BOARD. THESE ARE USED TO ASSESS RENEWAL REQUESTS.
Nah
His argument is actually not bad.
Good should fund BTC dev, bad should do nothing. Oh wait, the world doesn't work that way
Saylor really has no fucking clue what he is talking about, does he?
Open sats board has a lot more power to decide on where bitcoin goes than any of us individuals is saylor’s point.
And he is right
Thing is timestamped, sum up;
don't be a rushed dumb fuck,
mind your ego,
stay humble and learn what that means
And he didn’t provide any evidence. Where is the evidence he threatened or pressured ARK or anyone else? I’ll wait
It’s just hearsay. Don’t trust, Verify?
Listen to the 20 min that came before and the 20 min that came after that snippet. When he explained himself ya know
Eh, I listened to it again in full and Peter actually does ask some decent questions.
Strange take.
He sounds like he hasn't seen the list of projects supported by @npub10pen...n34f.
why are so many so desperate to malign Saylor? If you want an accurate summation if his take on this, at least listen to the whole episode... yikes
It’s almost like he didn’t want to be held responsible for the freedom it offers from the banks and governments
Perhaps wise to listen to the entire interview as opposed to a 30 second clip. His take is quite considered & coherent.
agreed. his position is quite rational.
it seems like a large subset of users would rather allow an out of context, 30 second clip, to trigger their pathological trust issues, than invest 60 minutes to hear out his actual position on the issue...
Watch the whole interview. All in all, I think he is more on your side, than you think.
You posted an out of context 30 second clip that proves nothing. Post his entire response to the question. It's exceptionally considered and puts the long term health of Bitcoin front and center with zero ambiguity.
STAY HUMBLE STACK SATS
You can believe what you want, people always will, regardless of any "evidence" provided.
This is @jack confirming the following note when @Hong Kim responded to a different note from @ODELL . View quoted note →
Lol just realized this is a continuation from the same thread
🫡
Yeah michael shared his opinion with cathie woods and many other people I’m sure
Jack’s comment is not a smoking gun for the allegation that Saylor threatened ARK or anyone else of the supported devs
if*
Fair, doing that now.
I thought he said a lot of good shit. Would love to see you two chop it up on RHR or Citadell Dispatch. ✌️
*cough* ecash *cough* *cough*
Same
Use the transcript
1) I HAVE NEVER MALIGNED SAYLOR.
2.) PEOPLE SHOULD LISTEN TO THE WHOLE INTERVIEW.
3) THIS IS AN IMPORTANT TOPIC AND OPEN DISCUSSION OF IT SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED. GLAD IT IS HAPPENING.
why are you so desperate to defend him?
SAME
I'm not interested in defending people, they can do that themselves. I'm interested in defending truth, and calling it out when certain people go witch-hunting.
The part where he suggests Bitcoin development should mirror the conservative nature of other highly technical engineering processes e.g. aeronautics, seems far more worthy of amplification than this oddly selected 30 seconds....
You’re walking irony. ❤️
Why dont we all just donate straight to devs then?
You can’t compete. Are you gonna fund a dev for 5 minutes? 5 months? 5 years? Do you have the funds for that?
Black rock does, several times over
Im not sure I understand your issue with opensats
I don’t have an issue with opensats, I also don’t think I stated anything that is untrue
My interpretation of his position with the devs, from the interview, was to make small steps that strengthen security and increase the base value proposition of Layer 1.
Layer 1 are the Nuclear Reactors
Layer 3 are the Acai Bowl Delivery Apps
to a simple mind, perhaps.. 😘
🫡
You are a walking ball of projection and false, ego centered compassion. Be gone.
The fact @npub15dql...lm5m won’t go on @CITADEL DISPATCH but rather discusses a weak strawman speaks volumes
Opensats board has ZERO power over Bitcoin.
In case you’d like to provided DID feedback to MSTR 
GitHub
Nostr · Issue #7 · MicroStrategy/did-btc-spec
Just in case your engineering and research team overlooked - nostr exists. Unlike decentralized in name only solutions such as ATProto, Nostr has t...
All beings are to seek out, and love, and speak the truth.
Def a BS answer.
He is visibly shook. The foundation for his logic on why he hasnt supported Bitcoin foss is very shakey and he is smart enough to know that.
Viste el episodio o solo el clip?
A el no le interesa discutir ese tema en publico. Dio su opinion por que Pedro le pregunto. Ademas por que va a querer hablar con alguien que dijo que amenazo a cathie woods y otros para que no donaran cuando solo expreso su opinion acerca del tema en privado. Bad faith criticism aint gonna get him on your pod
Exactly, discussion. Saylor said so himself in the interview. Slow thoughtful discussion.
What a complete fucking retard
Can they not find someone to develop or work on a BIP? I can’t do that, therefore they do have more power
Not hard to understand
I heard the entire interview, his point is actually reasonable imo. This clip out of context makes him look more extreme than he actually is. His argument that Segwit increasing the blocksize changed the mining economics possibly forever is the same Luke Dash Jr has been saying. He has a valid point. Note that he is definitely not against development in L2s and L3s. And he only appeals for maximum care in the main chain. Gives many engineering examples of dynamic systems going haywire with 2nd, 3rd - 6th order effects (typical Saylor hyperbole) when even small things are changed
Si que escuche el podcast entero.
Si tuviese intención de hacer clara su posición lo hablaría directamente con alguien que lo vaya a empujar un poco más y que esté metido directamente en el asunto de funding developers.
Los argumentos que presentó fueron realmente absurdos porque está diciendo que el no apoya una forma de desarrollo que absolutamente nadie con dos dedos de frente apoya.
So what? You choose what to run and what rules to agree with; people can work or fund all kinds of stupid shit, that doesn’t mean you have to run it!
If Bitcoin were susceptible to working that way then there would be a completely failed project.
💯
Esa no es su intención, por eso solo discute el tema en privado. En este caso le preguntaron su opinion en un foro publico. El esta laser focus como diría en apoyar a bitcoin de otras maneras. Odell fue el que trajo una discusión privada a el publico sin haber el estado presente de mas. Saylor como todo el mundo tiene derecho a tener opiniones de muchos temas que no desea discutir en publico. El no le debe explicaciones a nadie de algo que se discutió en privado.
La gente que actúa como si el estuviese liderando una campaña para que nadie apoye a el desarrollo en L1 no tiene mas nada que hacer.
I agree, but why are you denying that having funding to pay devs to work on bitcoin is not having more power than me who cannot afford to do that
Don't you get it man, Bitcoin Core devs are the government!
along with miners and non mining nodes
Saylor was making that analogy
I know
Because you choose what to run. It doesn’t matter what code *exists*, all that matters is what users use.
Greenpeace had a $5M budget to change a small part of the code. It would cost maybe $10 or $20k to do the actual code changing.
Getting people to run it, tho? Different story, and $5M, or $5B won’t get users to act against their own self-interest.
This is the Brilliance! of #Satoshi's design. The self-interest of the users control #Bitcoin.
Specifically the virtuous full nodes, and #Bitcoin loyalist. They are Bitcoin. Why would they act against themselves or tolerate others doing so..🧡😊
Better yet, only run software that stays true to the #Bitcoin ideals..🧡😊
Maintenance: Yes
Development: Not so much
Do you really think you know better about how Bitcoin should operate then it's creator.
"He who does not know, he does not know. Is indeed a fool." -Confucius
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" -mama
MY B
I would even go further. Why should a #noderunner verify the blocks of miners that support spam and garbage transactions.
It's not in our interest to do so. It causes blockchain bloat and unnecessary expense for virtuous nodes and #Bitcoin loyalist. We should sanction those miners and stop verifying their blocks.
Like I said. "If a block gets mind in the forest, and there's no one there to verify it. Does it make any money"..💀🧡😊
This is inane.
It isn't unlimited or ungoverned funding, and it isn't risking destabilizing the network. Rather, it is the lack of open source developer funding is what risks destabilizing the network (lack of eyeballs doing deep code review).
If any of the founders that control premined shitcoins started donating to bitcoin developers, I'd be happy about it. They have no means of changing or destabilizing the network. I choose what software I run and the consensus rules I subscribe to.
Saylor does a masterful job of talking out of both sides of his mouth throughout this interview.
View quoted note →
i havent watched it yet, does Peter do a terrible job? kinda why i havent watched
Solana devs (or whatever shitchain) are more than welcome to develop on bitcoin. If it's a good addition and I choose to upgrade my node to run it because I think it's the way to go then that's how Bitcoin works.
NOTE: doubtful Sol devs can cut the mustard in bitcoin development.
Yes. Yes I would.
Only seeing insults. It would be good for devs to challenge each point he makes so non-devs understand the concerns. @`ODELL`& @`Marty Bent`I'm relying on you two!
no, he didn't do a terrible job, particularly because the interview wasn't *about* this question, it was probably touched upon for like 5 or 10 minutes.
The issue is that saylor explained his position via-negativa where the opposite is an unsustainable and undefendable position he pretty much came up with.
I'm not sure Peter caught that that's what he was doing, but overall he pushed back a lot more than 99% of bitcoin influencers who salivate at the thought of having saylor pump their numbers.
that would require a hard fork. A hard fork to undo taproot and segwit? Not going to happen.
?
?
This statement is factually and easily provably incorrect. You should read the blocksize wars. No one can force you to run software. All developers can do is write software. Everyone has to choose what they want to run and it takes a super majority to change the network.
If you think it will break things just don’t run their software
That’s a meme
People running pre taproot Core are still affected by higher fees resulting from ordinals/runes. You can’t escape all unintended consequences from changes to the code
And if I have more money to fund things I want, and can pay ppl to explain why they should want it to
Would that not give me an edge?
The Blocksize Wars taught us it’s unlikely to help. All the big money and companies were on the size of a big blocks hard fork and they still failed.
That’s not to encourage complacency. How the small blockers won was educating, speaking out, advocating, etc.
If the development is open source, what does it matter? What is the fear here?
View quoted note →
ok, thats relieving to hear
Hi comments are reasonable, probably good to have him on your podcast.
Couldn’t make it work, doing something in July
Did you interview jack mallers when he came to Bedford ?
Your loss.
Develop just to develop on Bitcoin core is a bad idea.
On Bitcoin core, it must solve a real and durable problem (not an hypothetical or a temporary one) and benefits to everyone in the Network.
Saylor is wrong on this one.
First, I’m a Bitcoin developer, but before all, I’m a cypherpunk. No money in the world will make me go to any other path. By saying “we must avoid funding developers” Saylor is saying our souls are up for sale to the highest bid. Guess what, if I wanted to get rich, I would accept all job offers I get to work on Solana or Ethereum. But I don’t, so I stay poor and humble.
Second, shitcoin networks can still fund developers to develop on Bitcoin. It’s an open protocol, so anyone can do it. But by saying this, Saylor puts the good guys at a big disadvantage: we do not get paid, while the barbarians at the gate are.
Third, Saylor’s company is betting on new products (ex: DiD) on Bitcoin, so Bitcoin developers are, in lack of other words, competition for MicroStrategy.. So, Saylor is just saying “do not fund my competition”, which is, at least, dishonest.
My 2 sats.
it is opinion and I understand where is coming from.
The best approach is influencing the developpement rather than leaving it to someone else.
The 21M cap, decentralisation, censorship resistant and non confiscatable are none negociable properties and can never change.
I agree 100% with this
FOR EXAMPLE SEGWIT WAS A MAJOR MISTAKE
Well I learned a bit about Jack Dorsey last night via interview videos and you (Bitcoiners) should too.
Props, and I am definitely NOT an altruist.
Learned more than enough about Michael Saylor this morning. Don’t get me wrong, Saylor’s been good FOR Bitcoin, but Bitcoin has been better TO him.
Based on what I’ve found, would you even want Saylor to contribute to OpenSats? For one thing:
9. Growing up, Saylor played Dungeons and Dragons, and always insisted on being the Dungeon Master because he "liked to create and control situations."
What Saylor does with $30M:
10. He owns a yacht named USHER — after a computer software, not the singer. (Check out link at end)
More:
12. MicroStrategy is a business intelligence company that uses computer software to collect and sell consumer insight to customers.
13. In many ways, MicroStrategy is the forebearer of targeted ads as we know them today.
16. In 2000, MicroStrategy was accused by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for fraudulent finance reports. The claims were eventually settled, with Saylor himself paying $8.3 million of his personal money.
17. Following the accusations, MicroStrategy's stock plunged $6 million.
27. In addition to investing MicroStrategy's money into Bitcoin, Saylor himself (as of October,) held close to 18,000 Bitcoin.
Much of above ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED: FEB. 11, 2021
Even more telling:
IMO, who the fuck is Saylor to question motive?
JustLuxe
Tech Mogul Michael Saylor, Owner of <i>Entourage</i> Party Yacht, Starts Fractional Superyacht Ownership Program
Back in January we reported that the cast of the upcoming Entourage movie was filming some wild party scenes with topless models in Miami aboard th...
Totally agree.
Sounds like a waste of Bitcoin block space project.
What needs so much development?
Not for lack of skill but different principles and priorities
Gd
🫡🫡
Fighting over opinions and ideas is exactly as it should be. This is good for Bitcoin.
What bothers me most about Saylor isn't what he says or him. Its the hero worship of people like him. Make sure you are thinking for yourself. Don't hold secondhand opinions from Saylor or Odell.
Kinda weird that a clip with no comment is somehow maligning him. I haven't listened to his interview yet but I assumed Odell has. Everyone should make up their own minds and act accordingly. See, this personality and hero worship I see is really a bigger issue(not saying you worship Saylor).
It indeed has strawman vibes.
The broader context is important.
It was clipped to bolster an ongoing misrepresentation.
Speaking the truth and calling out witch-hunting shouldn't be conflated with hero worship.
All of our lives go better when we have access to more of the truth.
We all have access to the full interview. WBD is a big podcast. Not saying you were doing hero worship but plenty do with Saylor.
Why are you defensive and feel opensats was implicated in this discussion?