I watched the documentary Money Electric: The Bitcoin Mystery. Overall, it was decently entertaining and did a good job of covering a lot of Bitcoin's history. However, there were some inaccuracies or misleading portrayals. For example, the documentary failed to mention that "Bitcoin Jesus" (Roger Ver) is now primarily associated with Shitcoins, inaccurately claimed that Blockstream takes a portion of all Bitcoin transaction fees, and misrepresented the Blocksize War. It also completely omitted any discussion of the Lightning Network and framed Blockstream as a centralized force behind Bitcoin, which doesn't accurately reflect the decentralized nature of the Bitcoin's ecosystem.
As for the ending conclusion... Is it Peter Todd, because he's incredibly intelligent, invented Replace-by-Fee and understands Bitcoin better than most? I don't know and I don't care. It doesn't matter who Satoshi Nakamoto is. Bitcoin is stronger because we don't know.
What I do know is that since the journalist misrepresented Blockstream and the Blocksize Wars, it seems likely that other aspects of the documentary could also be misrepresented, like the portrayal of Peter Todd and the attempt to connect random dots to Satoshi Nakamoto.
Derek Ross
npub18a…tp424
2024-10-09 16:46:49
Author Public Key
npub18ams6ewn5aj2n3wt2qawzglx9mr4nzksxhvrdc4gzrecw7n5tvjqctp424Published at
2024-10-09 16:46:49Event JSON
{
"id": "69306a07f1048410a1bd6bdf92c19b64e875cacc9c50de17517414be06de7c33",
"pubkey": "3f770d65d3a764a9c5cb503ae123e62ec7598ad035d836e2a810f3877a745b24",
"created_at": 1728492409,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [],
"content": "I watched the documentary Money Electric: The Bitcoin Mystery. Overall, it was decently entertaining and did a good job of covering a lot of Bitcoin's history. However, there were some inaccuracies or misleading portrayals. For example, the documentary failed to mention that \"Bitcoin Jesus\" (Roger Ver) is now primarily associated with Shitcoins, inaccurately claimed that Blockstream takes a portion of all Bitcoin transaction fees, and misrepresented the Blocksize War. It also completely omitted any discussion of the Lightning Network and framed Blockstream as a centralized force behind Bitcoin, which doesn't accurately reflect the decentralized nature of the Bitcoin's ecosystem.\n\nAs for the ending conclusion... Is it Peter Todd, because he's incredibly intelligent, invented Replace-by-Fee and understands Bitcoin better than most? I don't know and I don't care. It doesn't matter who Satoshi Nakamoto is. Bitcoin is stronger because we don't know.\n\nWhat I do know is that since the journalist misrepresented Blockstream and the Blocksize Wars, it seems likely that other aspects of the documentary could also be misrepresented, like the portrayal of Peter Todd and the attempt to connect random dots to Satoshi Nakamoto.",
"sig": "a487bfb4dcb342df031f4f95eec8c506bf7829758de9421fa802419dc3497915ab14af714daeeaa3f0df39e7af2f6356301c70c1b069eb69ce84609d4d1d45e0"
}