{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1gymmksd9tgwzc5w33umlx08sc2ggys3v2cucmpvl7yy9720wh49s8dvff7","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1gymmksd9tgwzc5w33umlx08sc2ggys3v2cucmpvl7yy9720wh49s8dvff7","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2022-04-22\n📝 Original message:On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 at 09:56, Keagan McClelland via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e I think that trying to find ways to activate non-invasive changes should\n\u003e be everyone's goal, *even if* they personally may not have an immediate use\n\u003e case\n\u003e\n\nA change that increases the number of use cases of Bitcoin affects all\nusers and is *not* non-invasive. More use cases means more blockchain usage\nwhich increases the price of a transaction for *everyone*.\n\nI like the maxim of Peter Todd: any change of Bitcoin must benefit *all*\nusers. This means that every change must have well-defined and transparent\nbenefits. Personally I believe that the only additions to the protocol that\nwould still be acceptable are those that clearly benefit layer 2 solutions\nsuch as LN *and* do not carry the dangerous potential of getting abused by\nfreeloaders selling commercial services on top of “free” eternal storage on\nthe blockchain.\n\nZac\n\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220422/0fd0ef11/attachment.html\u003e"}