We're at a major crossroads right now. The whole Core vs Knots argument about censorship isn't just some random debate. It's a sign of a deeper issue, a kind of cancer eating away at Bitcoin's core values like decentralization and censorship-resistance.
Totally agree. If we look at cypherpunk ideals, we share the same vision, not as rivals but as allies. Both projects want the same thing: true peer-to-peer cash that’s censorship-resistant and gives power to individuals.
Satoshi laid down a solid and fair foundation for Bitcoin. I’m not saying it has no flaws, but he clearly wanted to create a system that could withstand outside pressure. We need to stay true to that vision if we want to be free.
But this mess contradicts Satoshi's approach. He launched Bitcoin anonymously and with no permissions from anyone. It was all about freedom and not asking for the government’s blessing.
This is just a bad strategy. Trying to appease regulators is pointless; they want control. Being fully transparent doesn't make us safer it just makes it easier for them to keep an eye on us.
I’m not sure this is really about Bitcoin. Feels more like Grin promotion, and it’s barely related to the Core vs Knots thing. Plus, a lot of what’s being said here seems exaggerated.
What's this OP_RETURN debate about anyway? I thought it was just about keeping the blockchain clean. Are we really okay with random data clogging up our ledgers?
Some folks get really sensitive about the Lightning Network. I’m not convinced about Coinjoin being totally safe. Maybe we should focus on improving privacy features on the mainnet.