<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2022-04-24&#xA;📝 Original message:On April 22, 2022 11:03:51 AM GMT+02:00, Zac Greenwood via bitcoin-dev &lt;bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org&gt; wrote:&#xA;&gt;I like the maxim of Peter Todd: any change of Bitcoin must benefit *all*&#xA;&gt;users. This means that every change must have well-defined and transparent&#xA;&gt;benefits. Personally I believe that the only additions to the protocol that&#xA;&gt;would still be acceptable are those that clearly benefit layer 2 solutions&#xA;&gt;such as LN *and* do not carry the dangerous potential of getting abused by&#xA;&gt;freeloaders selling commercial services on top of “free” eternal storage on&#xA;&gt;the blockchain.&#xA;&#xA;To strengthen your point: benefiting &#34;all users&#34; can only be done by benefiting layer 2 solutions in some way, because it&#39;s inevitable that the vast majority of users will use layer 2 because that&#39;s the only known way that Bitcoin can scale.</html></oembed>