With the same confusion we observe the seemingly suicidal behavior in certain rodents , it should observe the behavior of those who, after investing in Bitcoin, submit willingly to an organization that rejects the basic principles of operation of Bitcoin. Without the slightest remnant of critical spirit, mesmerized by the generous beard of an ideologue whose proposal, taken seriously, it would involve the destruction of Bitcoin, resemble the flock attributed supernatural powers to officials in charge of handling the fiat money. Not the sustainability or solvency of the system that inspires confidence, but the aura of mystery that surrounds experts in planning monetary policy.
According to the leaders of the movement cryptoleninista , developers are not to solve the problems experienced by network users. Far from offering solutions that users are free to adopt or reject, the developer mission is to shape the network through inspired theories to which the user must adapt interventions docility. From this perspective, any concession to user demands is a capitulation to market forces -¡vade retro - and a betrayal of the doctrine advocated by the intellectual vanguard .
The solution to the problem of Byzantine generals , courtesy of Satoshi Nakamoto, must then be abandoned and replaced by a series of experiments in which we are obliged to participate. Refuse to participate in the latest five - year plan and will be treated as an outdated gear, unable to meet his new role. You have to resign yourself; no time for explanations computing power must be replaced by surveys Twitter infested with puppets, competition between implementations championships tantrums on social networks, the debate over political maneuvers (read: threats), the emerging consensus at summits pseudo-representatives of the G7 style, among other rituals that do not necessarily please the social engineers but are seen by them as unavoidable steps on the ladder towards cryptoleninista utopia.
Have you ever wondered what it would look like in practice, the system that cryptoleninistas want to impose? No need to imagine, because they themselves have explained. Rates $ 100 or more will not be a problem, it seems , because Bitcoin is "digital gold" . Apparently there is no other cryptocurrency loitering lunch Bitcoin, salivating staring at the dish that much work has been prepared. Apparently, people and businesses who have been pushed out of Bitcoinlandia by the policy of artificially high tariffs will be happy to keep nodes within a system that can not be used. Apparently black is white and up is down .
If it is not clear the ultimate goal of the Blockstream boys, let 's look at a concrete example of what we have prepared. Suppose you have managed to maintain artificially restricted the size of the blocks, so that you need to open a channel of payment to access the privilege of operating in the Lightning Network without delegates. This requires a transaction in block chain. First you will have to pay the equivalent of about US $ 100 (or more, depending on the rate at the time) to open the channel payments, and then when you need to close it , you'll pay the same. Therefore, unless you're a big financial intermediary, you'll be forced to operate almost exclusively outside the chain block in the "second layer" controlled by Blockstream / Core assuming you have not left Bitcoin long before rates reach that range-. Do you understand now why AXA is the main investor behind Blockstream?
A long time ago that it is obvious to any rational observer that the interest of Blockstream / Core is focused on producing solutions and discuss their respective merits but to sabotage the organic growth of Bitcoin. Divert rates its original purpose (reward for those in charge of network security) and direct them towards the walled gardens of Blockstream / Core is the best way to meet the objective last of this organization, which is twofold: to weaken Bitcoin and put it under the dominion of the old financial elite.
But if you tame Bitcon was an easy task, and they would have succeeded for years. Something they say the melero badger .
According to the leaders of the movement cryptoleninista , developers are not to solve the problems experienced by network users. Far from offering solutions that users are free to adopt or reject, the developer mission is to shape the network through inspired theories to which the user must adapt interventions docility. From this perspective, any concession to user demands is a capitulation to market forces -¡vade retro - and a betrayal of the doctrine advocated by the intellectual vanguard .
The solution to the problem of Byzantine generals , courtesy of Satoshi Nakamoto, must then be abandoned and replaced by a series of experiments in which we are obliged to participate. Refuse to participate in the latest five - year plan and will be treated as an outdated gear, unable to meet his new role. You have to resign yourself; no time for explanations computing power must be replaced by surveys Twitter infested with puppets, competition between implementations championships tantrums on social networks, the debate over political maneuvers (read: threats), the emerging consensus at summits pseudo-representatives of the G7 style, among other rituals that do not necessarily please the social engineers but are seen by them as unavoidable steps on the ladder towards cryptoleninista utopia.
Have you ever wondered what it would look like in practice, the system that cryptoleninistas want to impose? No need to imagine, because they themselves have explained. Rates $ 100 or more will not be a problem, it seems , because Bitcoin is "digital gold" . Apparently there is no other cryptocurrency loitering lunch Bitcoin, salivating staring at the dish that much work has been prepared. Apparently, people and businesses who have been pushed out of Bitcoinlandia by the policy of artificially high tariffs will be happy to keep nodes within a system that can not be used. Apparently black is white and up is down .
If it is not clear the ultimate goal of the Blockstream boys, let 's look at a concrete example of what we have prepared. Suppose you have managed to maintain artificially restricted the size of the blocks, so that you need to open a channel of payment to access the privilege of operating in the Lightning Network without delegates. This requires a transaction in block chain. First you will have to pay the equivalent of about US $ 100 (or more, depending on the rate at the time) to open the channel payments, and then when you need to close it , you'll pay the same. Therefore, unless you're a big financial intermediary, you'll be forced to operate almost exclusively outside the chain block in the "second layer" controlled by Blockstream / Core assuming you have not left Bitcoin long before rates reach that range-. Do you understand now why AXA is the main investor behind Blockstream?
A long time ago that it is obvious to any rational observer that the interest of Blockstream / Core is focused on producing solutions and discuss their respective merits but to sabotage the organic growth of Bitcoin. Divert rates its original purpose (reward for those in charge of network security) and direct them towards the walled gardens of Blockstream / Core is the best way to meet the objective last of this organization, which is twofold: to weaken Bitcoin and put it under the dominion of the old financial elite.
But if you tame Bitcon was an easy task, and they would have succeeded for years. Something they say the melero badger .