Q: "Is there any smoking gun evidence or highly suspicious choices Bitcoin Core made? Is this intentional, or could they just be following economic incentives?"
Of course, it could be them just following economic incentives (that sweet Peter Thiel cheese), intentional, both, maybe they just like inscriptions, maybe they can't game theory and don't think of downstream effects, maybe they are retarded, maybe a combination or all of the above.
There's almost always a degree of plausible deniability, so I'm not accusing anyone of anything.
At the same time, I understand revealed preference (you look at what a system does to understand what it intends to do, in the same way you look at what people do, not what they say).
In my opinion, the strongest "smoking guns" are:
1) SegWit + Taproot economic channel (discounted witness + stealthy heavy scripts) is the enabler for inscriptions/data. (2021 activation via Speedy Trial shows coordination power.)
2) Replace-By-Fee normalization (v24 → v30 era) quietly kills zero-conf retail on L1 and pushes Medium-of-Exchange to intermediated rails.
3) Core v30 policy changes (default data-carrier liberalization; deprecating -datacarriersize) make mass payloads "standard" relay, shifting legal/ops risk to node runners and accelerating infra centralization.
4) BIP70 removal removed merchant-grade receipts/authentication from Core — another nudge toward processors and away from direct P2P commerce.
5) On May 10th, 2022, Bitcoin Core's developers removing Bitcoin's definition from the README.md file of their GitHub repository.
The GitHub README framing change (drop "What is Bitcoin?") is a soft-power tell: define the client, not the money.
I am sure if you ask them, they'll have a perfectly valid reason for removing Bitcoin's definition.
My best guess is that they removed the definition because it was misaligned with the changes they were making to the protocol.
Now they are changing something they can't define or won't define because the definition most Bitcoiners agree with massively diverges from Bitcoin Core's definition.
This is the GitHub commit ( https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/faeb5b59a098578b3e8c552d35b5ba02b12af14d ). The red lines are what is removed, the green lines are what it's replaced with.
https://blossom.primal.net/9818edc61763de08dcf3b2283ca65e9803cb7cb6efca69e18a963e54ba3933ba.png
From the outside look in, Bitcoin Core is a well-oiled machine. There's barely any dissent. It seems they all embrace the "Bitcoin is arbitrary data storage" narrative. They are solving the problem no Bitcoiner knew they had: "How to store your pictures on other people's computers".
nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqxq85jwpngf50eh3ju5kjlq46n6nma2g9m8namwl5ryw0586y3dpqqsx7xeaydr8ucqd0vl0n9nqgwpdz5ss0ytzmzu2u3s820l7cj3rrqs48mrj3
No comments:
Post a Comment