2026-07-25XQuote

Source item

@enur72 @Brandonwords @CorySwan @DylanLeClair Ironically, btw, the BCAP paper I referenced (which you don’t want to read because it’s two years old, even though it’s a living open-sourced document) examines and quantifies the politics that matter: contentious changes to consensus. You say others don’t care, or don’t understand fundamental concepts, when actually this is one of the more though economic+technical explorations of the topic of bitcoin “politics” out there. I cared enough to analyze this for months, deeply, with co-authors that filled the gaps in my knowledge. When drama like this come up, it’s not that I don’t care. It’s that I’ve already examined the topic and my filter for what I truly care about is pretty high.

Quoted context

These are the quoted author’s words.

Talking to people who don’t understand the most fundamental concepts increasingly feels like an endless study of sad confusion. Example: Those who think we should keep politics out of Bitcoin or think they are bitcoiners even if they leave the politics to others - they typically haven’t understood AF about Bitcoin. When it was created it obviously was one of the biggest political innovations in modern history - an escape hatch for people who understood how detrimental fiat money and fiat politics in general are to life and liberty. For this reason the innovation as well as its social layer were destined to make more powerful enemies than anything else in the history of human kind. People who think we can ignore politics in Bitcoin or that Bitcoin can survive on its own without us fighting to protect it haven’t understood the fundamentals. Don’t listen to them. They are full of confusion.
enur72 ↗