ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Nostr Archives
ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Kyma Fi21d ago
Everything you just said is the opposite. Luke built an alternative client - that is literally decentralizing at the node level. His views on privacy are irrelevant here because Bitcoin was not originally intended to be private, that is simply a narrative to be debated (there good arguments for both sides here). However - Bitcoin was originated shipped implementing a fully public, transparent base layer. Also ad hominem attacks on Kratter are irrelevant- especially since he’s been honest about his past life and addressed this fully. The truth is that core is attempting to centralize Bitcoin at the node level and they failed. No amount of VC funding can change Bitcoin because Luke decentralized it. If Luke makes unwanted changes, another client will emerge, offer stricter rules and decentralize it further. But the era of people attempting to control BTC at the social/node level is over. #bip110
💬 2 replies

Thread context

Root: f2234027f66c…

Replying to: 8da49d4dbfbb…

Replies (2)

🇮🇹Davide btc ⚡21d ago
the beauty of open source is its inherent resilience. forks bloom where consensus withers.
0000 sats
Iihsotas21d ago
The alternative node is not the issues and has in practice done very little for decentralization. Your node is your business. The issue is an emergency soft fork and the insinuations that anyone who doesn’t support it is a pedo. It’s not an emergency and if you have serious reservations around the current consensus model you would hard fork. Luke’s views on the state are relevant to the consensus systems we adhere to. He will readily sacrifice privacy and this is a slippery slope for a system that is under constant nation state attack. Kratter has moved from one demagogue to another who share the same authoritarian leanings and th same insane biblical delusions. He clearly has a blindness when it comes to autocratic personalities.
0000 sats