melvincarvalho on Nostr: I see what you're saying, but this misses a key point—Bitcoin isn’t just code, ...
I see what you're saying, but this misses a key point—Bitcoin isn’t just code, it’s a social contract. Hundreds of millions trust it as a store of value, whether or not that was the original intent. That trust is Bitcoin, and developers can’t ignore it.
Bitcoin’s network is extremely hard to attack, so the real attack vector is consensus—and the method of choice is divide and conquer. We’ve seen this before with BCH, and we see it now with soft fork pushes. If there were real demand for these changes, they could merge mine—but they don’t, because there isn’t.
We need to get better at spotting such attacks before they can do damage. Bitcoin stays strong because it’s stable, hard to change, and takes a conservative approach. But keeping it that way takes a bit of work. The longer we hold off attacks the better the track record, and stronger bitcoin becomes.
Bitcoin’s network is extremely hard to attack, so the real attack vector is consensus—and the method of choice is divide and conquer. We’ve seen this before with BCH, and we see it now with soft fork pushes. If there were real demand for these changes, they could merge mine—but they don’t, because there isn’t.
We need to get better at spotting such attacks before they can do damage. Bitcoin stays strong because it’s stable, hard to change, and takes a conservative approach. But keeping it that way takes a bit of work. The longer we hold off attacks the better the track record, and stronger bitcoin becomes.