I would say the discussion is almost 100% non technical. It's about the degradation of bitcoins culture, morality, bitcoins governmental structure, and balance of power dynamics. Could we be more ci...
The discussion is regarding the data being allowed and the technical framework (incentives) around it. OPReturn as a vessel for arbitrary data etc. This is all technical.
The morality piece is a next layer abstraction presuming what people *might* do when given the technical capability. That is when the subjective morality piece comes in. Yes, morality, culture and power dynamics are part of it but it stems from the incentives amd disincentives presented by each proposed technical solution.
Im not saying those are irrelevant. Im saying that the assumptions made by assuming someone's morality based on the implementation they support without other evidence is not constructive in the big picture.
Lets say I support bip110. Lets say bip110 forks and becomes the primary chain. But it came about by slandering and shitting on non bip110-ers. Great, you win the battle and bip110 is "bitcoin" and youve "won" the culture war within the bitcoin echo chamber. But the rest of the world doesn't make that distinction. All they see are bitcoiners as immoral criminals or whatever labels the winning camp placed on the losing camp and vice versa. From a hyperbitcoinization/adoption perspective, this hurts in the long run.
We don't all agree but for those of us wanting sovereign freedom money, we are all aiming for the same general goal. We don't all agree on how we get there but if we continue the infighting, there will be no one left to defend bitcoin when the bigger enemy scoops down.
Call it moral high ground or whatever you want but im looking at the bigger long term picture.
The morality piece is a next layer abstraction presuming what people *might* do when given the technical capability. That is when the subjective morality piece comes in. Yes, morality, culture and power dynamics are part of it but it stems from the incentives amd disincentives presented by each proposed technical solution.
Im not saying those are irrelevant. Im saying that the assumptions made by assuming someone's morality based on the implementation they support without other evidence is not constructive in the big picture.
Lets say I support bip110. Lets say bip110 forks and becomes the primary chain. But it came about by slandering and shitting on non bip110-ers. Great, you win the battle and bip110 is "bitcoin" and youve "won" the culture war within the bitcoin echo chamber. But the rest of the world doesn't make that distinction. All they see are bitcoiners as immoral criminals or whatever labels the winning camp placed on the losing camp and vice versa. From a hyperbitcoinization/adoption perspective, this hurts in the long run.
We don't all agree but for those of us wanting sovereign freedom money, we are all aiming for the same general goal. We don't all agree on how we get there but if we continue the infighting, there will be no one left to defend bitcoin when the bigger enemy scoops down.
Call it moral high ground or whatever you want but im looking at the bigger long term picture.
1