GM☕ #coffeechain
About scaling and self sovereignty on Bitcoin:
As this has become more of a topic the last 3-4 months, much thanks to Peter McCormack, I've had many thoughts around this pile up, but not quite being able to articulate them well.
Yesterday I listened to calle 👁️⚡👁️ (npub12rv…85vg) on Citadel Dispatch, and this one quote from the podcast was sortof a light bulb moment for me:
"Ecash is not a scaling solution for Bitcoin".
This in many ways sums up the concerns I have around scaling for Bitcoin.
Basically what he said (if I can take the liberty) is that unless you PRESERVE the properties of Bitcoin, then you ARE NOT scaling Bitcoin.
I guess there is some nuance there, as any layer 2 etc, will not be the exact same thing, so what will such a criteria look like?
But looking at the overarching picture, you want the ability to self sovereignly hold your bitcoin and to be able to transact freely with it.
This is basically the problem Gold ended up having.
Fiat was layer on top of Gold that made it much more efficient to store and transact with. But it DIDN'T PRESERVE THE PROPERTIES OF GOLD.
It could be debased, and it could be censored.
The big challenge for Bitcoin IMO, is that we don't end up in a fiat 2.0 situation.
What I mean by that is that Bitcoin is reduced to a financial asset and base layer for institutions. But for the vast number of people, they are interacting with a layer on top THAT IS NOT PRESERVING the properties of Bitcoin, and are thus faced with the same problems of debasement, censorship and surveillance as we have today.
worshipbitcoin
npub1w4…5j067
2024-03-20 08:22:24
Author Public Key
npub1w4j2y74wx24sckf7ymgnf3r4gp0yqd8huw8kzfyt2lj8lhmh7ujs75j067Published at
2024-03-20 08:22:24Event JSON
{
"id": "2ebf1c42b876ca2c97a081423c2656a74cb7592959a1c0525aad6e471c8b0949",
"pubkey": "7564a27aae32ab0c593e26d134c475405e4034f7e38f61248b57e47fdf77f725",
"created_at": 1710922944,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"t",
"coffeechain"
],
[
"p",
"50d94fc2d8580c682b071a542f8b1e31a200b0508bab95a33bef0855df281d63",
"",
"mention"
]
],
"content": "GM☕ #coffeechain\n\nAbout scaling and self sovereignty on Bitcoin:\n\nAs this has become more of a topic the last 3-4 months, much thanks to Peter McCormack, I've had many thoughts around this pile up, but not quite being able to articulate them well.\n\nYesterday I listened to nostr:npub12rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sf485vg on Citadel Dispatch, and this one quote from the podcast was sortof a light bulb moment for me:\n\n\"Ecash is not a scaling solution for Bitcoin\".\n\nThis in many ways sums up the concerns I have around scaling for Bitcoin.\n\nBasically what he said (if I can take the liberty) is that unless you PRESERVE the properties of Bitcoin, then you ARE NOT scaling Bitcoin.\n\nI guess there is some nuance there, as any layer 2 etc, will not be the exact same thing, so what will such a criteria look like?\n\nBut looking at the overarching picture, you want the ability to self sovereignly hold your bitcoin and to be able to transact freely with it.\n\nThis is basically the problem Gold ended up having.\n\nFiat was layer on top of Gold that made it much more efficient to store and transact with. But it DIDN'T PRESERVE THE PROPERTIES OF GOLD.\n\nIt could be debased, and it could be censored.\n\nThe big challenge for Bitcoin IMO, is that we don't end up in a fiat 2.0 situation. \n\nWhat I mean by that is that Bitcoin is reduced to a financial asset and base layer for institutions. But for the vast number of people, they are interacting with a layer on top THAT IS NOT PRESERVING the properties of Bitcoin, and are thus faced with the same problems of debasement, censorship and surveillance as we have today.",
"sig": "2c52981754264646d75cf05e306b5854841951e0ee6e208407a90b6cfb045c2f08b8494e6987cd867aa329ad966a19a9ea5d46707295128681876d3b0b2e1d7f"
}