Bitcoin is perhaps the greatest tool for economic freedom in a generation—maybe more. Unfortunately, Bitcoin has been furiously stifled by a brutal civil war for about five years now; waged by professional social engineers from some of the most powerful companies in the social media space. Their talent in the art and science of manipulation has kept Bit coiners largely fighting among themselves rather than pursuing inroads into data-driven business models that could revolutionize the global economy.
In the wake of the Bitcoin civil war, three competing versions of Bitcoin have emerged (BTC, BCH and Bitcoin SV), about 3,000 other “cryptocurrency” projects and tokens masquerading as legitimate businesses—until the almost guaranteed exit scam. The main benefactor of the Bitcoin civil war has been Ethereum: a global state machine that allows easy deployment of tokens and smart contracts, but the Ethereum protocol cannot scale, and of the thousands of projects launched, only a handful could even conceivably be touted as having the ingredients necessary to ever become legitimate businesses. The rest are Ponzi schemes or illegal securities offerings—enriching developers and scamming amateur investors.
It is against this backdrop that BTC and BCH advocates, Ethereum spokes mouths and alt coiners of all stripes align to attack the Bitcoin protocol preserved only by the BSV network without ceasing. An industry made up almost entirely of criminals, frauds and scammers have united against BSV, citing (of all things) purported fraud and the alleged scam that is BSV’s very existence.
It is my firm belief that among the engaged, the motivation is fear of BSV’s singular ability to absorb the global economy and all the other “crypto” projects that come with that. For the unengaged, or those who don’t understand the power of Bitcoin, they are swept up in a culture war that they do not understand. It is crucial to understand the powers at play and their implications to Bitcoin and the global economy.
Since Bitcoin had no value when it launched, it was extremely easy to mine, and also free to send tons of transactions. In theory, this was a Denial of Service (DoS) Attack vector. A DoS or DDoS attack is when nodes get flooded with more data than they can handle, and they crash. On a young Bitcoin network, a crash like this would have been deemed a failure of the network, so a cap of 1mb of data for every ten minutes of transaction time was hard coded into the software—planting the first seed of the Bitcoin civil war. From 2009 until 2017, that 1 MB limit on total transactions was the single most contentious technical aspect of bitcoin.
Small blockers believe that Bitcoin is not a payment network, but rather that it is more akin to a decentralized Swiss bank designed to store Bitcoins that never move: a sort of digital gold vault. They wanted the 1 MB block size limit to remain permanent under the auspices of every person running a governing “full node” without having to pay for too much hard drive space. This would mean that at times of congestion, transaction fees would become absurdly high, but that would not matter because bitcoin should not be transacted except in large denominations or in big batches anyways
You must be logged in to post a comment.