The real tragedy of this betrayal lies in the fact that it was avoidable. The move away from micropayments and low-cost transactions was not a natural evolution; it was a deliberate choice by those who came to control the protocol.
BTC Core developers, like central planners with their own agendas, prioritised solutions like SegWit and Taproot that further entrenched their control, while sidelining the original goals of scalability and financial inclusion. They centralised decision-making, stripping power away from the users and businesses who had built their operations on the promises made by Bitcoin’s earliest advocates.
By capping the block size and keeping fees high, BTC Core ensured that the wealthiest players—the financial institutions, the exchanges, the speculators—could dominate the system while the small, everyday users were left in the dust.
Ayn Rand might have seen in this a familiar story: the tragedy of a world where the creators and builders are shackled by those who seek to control them.
The individuals who embraced Bitcoin in its infancy did so because it promised them the freedom to build—to innovate, to create, to transact without restriction. But when the system no longer rewards innovation, when it punishes those who seek to create value through free trade, it becomes a tool not of liberation, but of oppression.
Thomas Sowell would remind us that the unintended consequences of these decisions are clear: by stifling competition and increasing costs, BTC Core has erected barriers that hurt the very people Bitcoin was meant to serve.
And so, individuals who once believed in Bitcoin’s potential now find themselves as outsiders in a system they helped to build.
Many of these early adopters did not secure their Bitcoin holdings with the intensity that today’s market would suggest, because they didn’t expect Bitcoin to become a speculative asset detached from its original purpose.
They trusted that the network would evolve to scale, that it would continue to support small transactions and empower individuals to transact globally, but BTC Core’s changes have left them stranded. Their early involvement, once a symbol of hope, now feels like an abandoned promise.
But these early adopters have not been completely silenced. Just as Rand’s heroes stand against the tides of collectivism and coercion, these individuals stand today in opposition to the forces that have betrayed Bitcoin’s original vision.
They are not seeking handouts or special privileges; they are demanding a return to integrity, a return to the principles that made Bitcoin great in the first place.
They want a system that works for all, that upholds the promise of small, casual transactions, and that doesn’t require the wealthiest players to win at the expense of the everyday user.
The battle for Bitcoin is not just a technical one—it is a battle of ideas. The notion that individuals can transact freely, without oppressive fees, without the control of a central authority, is not just a technological breakthrough; it is a moral imperative.
If we allow BTC Core to continue on this path, we allow them to take away the power of choice, the power of the individual to transact without coercion and without cost. It’s a fight for liberty in the digital age.
2/3
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 23, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1849015497683308736?t=qvm14WdTc_xih9KP5irgRg&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1645
BTC Core developers, like central planners with their own agendas, prioritised solutions like SegWit and Taproot that further entrenched their control, while sidelining the original goals of scalability and financial inclusion. They centralised decision-making, stripping power away from the users and businesses who had built their operations on the promises made by Bitcoin’s earliest advocates.
By capping the block size and keeping fees high, BTC Core ensured that the wealthiest players—the financial institutions, the exchanges, the speculators—could dominate the system while the small, everyday users were left in the dust.
Ayn Rand might have seen in this a familiar story: the tragedy of a world where the creators and builders are shackled by those who seek to control them.
The individuals who embraced Bitcoin in its infancy did so because it promised them the freedom to build—to innovate, to create, to transact without restriction. But when the system no longer rewards innovation, when it punishes those who seek to create value through free trade, it becomes a tool not of liberation, but of oppression.
Thomas Sowell would remind us that the unintended consequences of these decisions are clear: by stifling competition and increasing costs, BTC Core has erected barriers that hurt the very people Bitcoin was meant to serve.
And so, individuals who once believed in Bitcoin’s potential now find themselves as outsiders in a system they helped to build.
Many of these early adopters did not secure their Bitcoin holdings with the intensity that today’s market would suggest, because they didn’t expect Bitcoin to become a speculative asset detached from its original purpose.
They trusted that the network would evolve to scale, that it would continue to support small transactions and empower individuals to transact globally, but BTC Core’s changes have left them stranded. Their early involvement, once a symbol of hope, now feels like an abandoned promise.
But these early adopters have not been completely silenced. Just as Rand’s heroes stand against the tides of collectivism and coercion, these individuals stand today in opposition to the forces that have betrayed Bitcoin’s original vision.
They are not seeking handouts or special privileges; they are demanding a return to integrity, a return to the principles that made Bitcoin great in the first place.
They want a system that works for all, that upholds the promise of small, casual transactions, and that doesn’t require the wealthiest players to win at the expense of the everyday user.
The battle for Bitcoin is not just a technical one—it is a battle of ideas. The notion that individuals can transact freely, without oppressive fees, without the control of a central authority, is not just a technological breakthrough; it is a moral imperative.
If we allow BTC Core to continue on this path, we allow them to take away the power of choice, the power of the individual to transact without coercion and without cost. It’s a fight for liberty in the digital age.
2/3
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 23, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1849015497683308736?t=qvm14WdTc_xih9KP5irgRg&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1645
Comments
Be the first to add a comment
Log in to comment