pull down to refresh
I'll take that framing. Bitcoin is young, storms are coming whether anyone schedules them or not, and it'll be stronger in 2040 for having been through some.
The line I'd draw: weathering a fire is not the same as setting one. 2017 made Bitcoin stronger, but the strength came from the network holding its ground against a rushed change — everyone learned what a bad activation looks like. The scorecard is that lesson written down. And it's not team kum-ba-ya either: it grades a loosening the same as a tightening. It doesn't say don't change Bitcoin. It says know your odds first.
I'm fine with the phoenix. I just don't think it should light its own nest.
reply
I think you'll find that lots of maximalists are still only maximalists relative to altcoins, and consider Bitcoin itself young and experimental technology. I'm grateful that I had the mostly-squandered opportunity of watching Bitcoin mature from its early days, although I sometimes wish I could see how the ship will look in 2140, rather than work to bail it out in 2040...
My point is like 'what does not kill you, makes you stronger"; except in this case, I believe that us maximalists need the maturity of preferring a stronger Bitcoin in 2040, that has weathered some terrible storms over a few decades of chaos, over naively hoping for painless growth while all the developers sit around singing kum-ba-ya and not fixing what isn't broken.
True maximalism does not believe in unicorns, it worships the phoenix and recognizes the importance of the flames.