From the anti-systemic adversarial thinking of the early cypherpunks, to the messianism of bitcoin gurus peddling digital gold narratives and leveraged-get rich-quick-schemes.
Someone like Saylor should be (metaphorically?) stoned in the town square, as far as I'm concerned.
Of course, we put on a brave face, but the Bitcoin community—ever since it went mainstream—is no longer truly revolutionary.
By now it's co-opted by the Powers That Be for the most part (see ScamSaylor, ZionTodd, Andy Back).
Complacency in revolutions is a terminal disease.
I try to stay detached and self-critical, because I'm the first one who drank the Kool-Aid (or at least turned a blind eye) to the institutionalization via the digital scarcity/digital gold narrative as the unavoidable pathway to "getting rich".
Who doesn't want to see the price go up eventually?
But without an actual P2P digital money use case, the SOV use case alone is, at best, a suboptimal scenario, at worst an existential threat to Bitcoin in the medium-to-long term (empty blocks or worse blocks full of spam instead of monetary transactions are a death sentence in the long run for hashrate and therefore for Bitcoin—as I've been hammering home ad nauseam for 3 years now.)
My2sats
quotingThe involution of bitcoiners...
nevent1q…3qg2
