It's clearer than even, Laser Eye Maxis lost the plot.
In all my years as a fan of Open Source Technologies I've never seen a group of people sell themselves to the devil as hard as Laser Eye Maxis have.
The same group of people who said that they "will destroy the banks", "will defund the state", "will bank the unbanked" are now telling you that it doesn't matter, it won't matter and it never mattered, all that matter was always, and will always be "Number go Up" confirming what the critics like David Gerard and Amy Castor have been saying: These people only care about them becoming the new rulers.
The laser eyes don't want you to spend your Bitcoin, hindering it as money, they don't want to improve Bitcoin out of fear that it becomes too useful and their non-economic nodes need to be pruned, as it was intended from day one, and at the same time they want you to run Lightning (which is awesome when it works btw) making your lose funds if you ever fuck up a channel, they want you to accept custody as the way to scale Bitcoin because their favourite influencer told them that it's OK, why? Because they are not "the evil banks", forgetting completely that the problem is not who runs the show, but that somebody is able to run the show at all.
While they tell you how "FIAT things ruin you and make you greedy, Bitcoin fixed this" they also push for "SoV is all that matters", "nobody will be able to use Bitcoin and everyone will use Bitcoin banks", basics going full circle, from "fuck banks" to "fuck the FIAT banks, Bitcoin banks are OK", the reason? Because somehow everything that is based on Bitcoin is moral, and everything else is a shitcoin, experimentation is prohibited, the betterment of things are prohibited, making Bitcoin accessible to the people they parrot the most about is also prohibited, remember that "Bitcoin is a bottoms up movement" but you also need to do "UTXO management and only have a lot of sats in order to use them in the future".
I really thought that maxis were on par with the GNU cultists of yore, they were obnoxious, virtue signaling assholes who only by principle, not by virtue of technical prowess, a group of people who were not contempt with people using Linux, but they wanted everyone to run on crappy hardware and software just because it was FLOSS (Free/Libre Open Source Software), and if you didn't you were a FED, a estate actor, and most likely, paid by Microsoft to "destroy the GNU project" but nope, the maxis are worst, I've never seen a group as stupid as the Laser Eye Maxis.
They sold themselves to the banks because NgU is all that matters "Bitcoin was always a SoV", "MoE is a distraction", "Everyone who thinks differently is a shitcoiner".
When you kick your own ideas on the butt: you've lost the plot.
When your heroes become your enemies: you've lost the plot.
When you go from "fuck the State" to "Ver deserves what the State gives him because he is a shitcoiner": you've lost the plot.
I really think that Bitcoin will survive this, but be warned, the maxis are the worst attack on Bitcoin, and they just lost the plot, they will fall into irrelevance and any other virtue signaling group of idiots have done before them, and they will be remembered as the mark of Bitcoin's darkest era.
376 sats \ 2 replies \ @anon 12 May
reply
🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 , the only thing thicker than a maxi is the plot
reply
I will never not like this meme
reply
This post is a psychic attack. Nothing said reflects reality. Usually a good lie has a mix of truth and lies, but this post came from a parallel dimension where reality is mirrored to our own
reply
These people exist in our own reality and they are offended by this post.
reply
You know I can only see the tweet and not the context right?
Well anyway, if I take what you're saying at face value, then you're bringing twitter drama over to SN for some reason, but why? Twitter is designed around engagement farming, so you're feeding trolls over there.
That all said, I can actually explain why I think something is a shitcoin including monero.
reply
Didn't know and also I automatically assume that people have Twitter accounts, since everyone I know has one even if they don't use it.
I didn't think that Stacker had it's only subculture drama that doesn't mix with Twitter's (in hindsight this is obvious), but more than anything I'm posting gere to have a good place to post it, it's for me a lot better than having a blog or posting on Reddit where I know Theymos and BashCo will ban me because this will offend them directly.
About the shitcoin thing, you don't have to, the point is not that of if things are or not shitcoins, the point is that no matter how good something is for an specific use case, people Will tell you not just to not use it, but that you're some kind of monster for eveb implying that you would.
reply
42.1k sats \ 4 replies \ @anon 12 May
So I see the the big blockers are back at work. I was hoping that with Ver in jail we'd get a break, but I guess he paid a few in advance and they still have a so money left to earn. You won't be able to pay for your coffee on the first layer. Deal with it.
Yes you should pay for things in bitcoin. No I don't want the State to put people in jail for taxes, not even Bitcoin Judas.
No I won't be pruning my node. Without a small blockchain, you don't have decentralization. Without decentralization, we have nothing.
Yes, you'll have to use second layers and mints and whatever for small payments. Deal with it. It was always going to be that way. Anybody who thought about it for a few minutes knew that was always going to be necessary. Satoshi also said that.
reply
254 sats \ 0 replies \ @anon 12 May
well said!
reply
Sir, its an open network, I can have my own opinions.
If I was somehow a Ver paid shill, trust me, I wouldn't be here ranting about people like you while well knowing that the response would be this idiotic.
"Big blockers are bad boohoo".
reply
reply
Well said.
reply
You should spend less time worrying about what other people do with their bitcoin.
reply
BDGAF
reply
Not all maxis are NgU-fanatics.
reply
Wrong, Bitcoin is money... Money = ngu
If you're not for ngu you're a jpeg hoarding shitcoiner
reply
Wow, that response really deserved spending some sats... Guess I'm out of touch with the Twitter narrative.
Never hoarded any jpegs partner.
reply
Jumping in there just to say that "NgU fanatics" means hodling the sats as there was no tomorrow and never using them in the fkng real life. People do not use bitcoin to pay for stuff, which is very very very very dangerous for our industry. Do you think that merchants all of a sudden will start accepting bitcoin just because we hang about saying that is good money? Bitcoin is good money, but not anyone gets that, and if the farmer that should sell you the meat is not getting the Bitcoin gist, then no meat for you mate.
Financial-bitcoin is liquid, very liquid. Huge volumes for that potentially, so the bag holders can sell their damn KYC bitcoin to ETFs and back.
But real-life-economy-bitcoin? Is it liquid enough? Will I be able to pay for a pizza, hotel, groceries with bitcoin in 2030? Will I be able to actually spend my good, very good money in the future?
So yeah, NgU is inscribed in the idea of money, but let's not forget that money eventually needs to be spent. If you can, than that's good money. If not, than what are we talking about?
PS. Collateralizing UTXOs in order to get new brand printed fiat shitcoins is not the future I imagine, even though that's a use case. But still, at the end of the chain the sats should have a real-economy value in transactional economy.
End of the rant of a bitcoiner that tried for years to talk about adoption and spend&replace.
reply
This sounds like a time preference grief.
I came into Bitcoin as an agorist interested in MoE, but thats a latter act in the story.
The farmer needs to save in Bitcoin otherwise he has no reason to exchange for it.
Stingy people exist in fiat too, there's far more of them clutching their shekels earning yield below the rate of inflation.
reply
Appreciate your time preference horizon, you may be right. I don't think in Act terms because I see things as more complex than a simple n-step evolution, mass MoE shall happen before the mass adoption as SoV, otherwise mass SoV withouth MoE means full bag holders with no use case.
Farmer may start receiving bitcoin and then start studying it. From studying he/she maturates understanding and starts saving the bitcoin that he receives from time to time, when before he/she was selling to get fiat. This is not a necessary path, but is how 90/95% of merchants accepting bitcoin actually understood bitcoin, at least from my experience.
reply
Sure there's no true line if demarcation, but general adoption waves
The bigger issue is when people gripe about anyone with an SoV focus, that's always a first principle and not mutually exclusive to MoE
The MoE tools I build are only possible because they bring the prospect of being monetized with a SoV
reply
I would posit to you two things: (a) The market has decided that Bitcoin is a SoV, not some random twitter personalities and (b) Attitudes change and new information comes in.
I think what really happened is that in 2014 -- in a state of naivety -- everyone was convinced Bitcoin was magically going to be this incredible payment tech that would destroy Visa. Then LN came along in 2018 and seemed to bolster this view.
Since then, the realization of scaling woes has hit everyone...and they now see that scaling Bitcoin to serve 7B people is technically impossible in its current form. Even though LN helps, it doesn't really solve any of the core scaling issues. Therefore, a new approach was needed.
This new approach comes with the notion that Bitcoin is currently serving only as a SoV, thus it makes no sense to loudly promote it as otherwise.
Likewise the market itself has chosen Bitcoin to be a SoV. People simply do not want to buy coffee today for $3 that will be $300 in 10 years time. Its not a rational investment choice.
reply
This is an overly simplistic view.
SoV is a pre-requisite to MoE...
I personally came into Bitcoin as an agorist interested in MoE, but without SoV we may as well do that in an SQL database.
The correct framing is Act 1 vs Act 2
realization of scaling woes
There's been no such thing, a small cohort of shitcoiners and virtue signalers PROJECT scaling woes...REALity is that fees are barely 10% of the newly halved subsidy.
Bitcoin is money. It doesn't solve for people not having money.
It does however enable permissionless earning of money, but the middle bell curve can't process that's a task now for the shell and not the core.
reply
small cohort of shitcoiners and virtue signalers PROJECT scaling woes
what you say has an element of truth, but that doesn't change the math.
There is no way to onboard the world with ~200 million transactions per year.
reply
Depends on your definition of onboarding the world
Your math is also wrong, we can open a billion lightning channels per year with existing batching
reply
1B txn per year
So 500M channel opens + 500M channel closes and no other onchain activity....still doesn't seem like enough?
reply
Enough for what?
If you buy into the 8BN framing it's not a serious conversation, it becomes a divisibility issue long before it's ever a blockspace bottleneck. Dust will always be dust.
Just as there's not 8BN houses, 8BN refrigerators, or 8BN cars... there's not 8BN custodians. Families share things... nodes will be among those things: Lightning.Pub
reply
Enough for what?
To act as a global MoE
What do you think the likely maximum number of active users BTC can support now (with batching and LN)?
100M individual active users?
reply
Global MoE doesn't have a hard number, so you're speculating
How is a user defined? A lightning channel? Could batch a few billion over 5~ year hyper growth
But that assumes there's even that many people with assets
Reality is there's no technical ceiling in sight, it's a socio-economic ceiling of the golden billion who largely own equity and not money
Wait, we don't want you to spend but also want you on Lightning?
I think you forgot your morning lithium shake, Princess
reply
Yes, a lot of people contradict themselves, just read the comments.
reply
It's so tiring, these Sheila's in their period crying: "All maxis say this and it's wrong!!!". Never giving an example from an actual hardcore maxi who actually said that.
reply
I had so many tweets saved, but maxis are good at blocking anyone who doesn't think like them.
Find a hole in their logic and boom, blocked.
reply
Just follow better people. I didn't see anything in my timeline that aligns with what you're describing.
reply
10 sats \ 2 replies \ @xz 12 May
Ascribing some meme to put people in boxes is not really helpful either, gen zee, x, boomers, big blockers, huge knockers.
Roger Ver was never my hero, but also I've never wished any harm upon him. Maybe people couldn't care less because other people are also getting in trouble that have been building with the core tenets of Bitcoin, a peer-to-peer electronic cash system in mind.
NGU ≠ GNU
Everyone's a critic, expert/guru, idiot.. are David Gerard and Amy Castor exceptions?
reply
There are groups of people who define themselves as something, a lot of maxis describe themselves as that: maxis.
I wasn't around when Roger was "Bitcoin Jesus", but it's terrible to see people happy that he is going to jail, ceasing shitcoinery is more important than fighting the estate it seems.
Exactly, NgUs are equally as idiotic, but at least the GNU guys had, and still have some principles, the NgU maxis are becoming the new cryptobros, blinded by money and thinking anyone else is an idiot.
No, Amy and David are no exceptions, my point is that maybe they were right about their position on some Bitcoin users, and if they are right about these people, its means that these people are completely wrong.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @xz 12 May
Yeah, I guess that's true. People like to describe themselves as these things too. I didn't mean to say you were pigeonholing them. Yeah, I think lots of people got into NGU and later found based principles. I'm no different.
I looked up who you were talking about. You and they are probably right about people picking the wrong most important issue to rail against. I try not to think of things in terms of wrong and right. I imagine that it's difficult for some to let go of the idea that it's some kind of karmic justice for a charlatan. I was just watching from the sidelines during that time, very much the NGU boy you describe. Hopefully we all grow and change.
reply
I think Maxxis are part of bitcoin. Without them, would bitcoin be shown to other people? You have to take the good with the bad. You cant just cherry pick the things you like and ignore the rest!
reply
Yeah I know. The maxis are a part of Bitcoin that we will carry for a long time, they won't disappear, but that doesn't mean that they haven't betray themselves.
reply
Have they really betrayed themselves? By what metric?
reply
They were the ones preaching that we need to defund the old system, just to see themselves asking for daddy Wall Street to give us NgU and please be the Bitcoin banks and scale Bitcoin with trust because changing Bitcoin to be scalable is too scary.
reply
Can you provide one actual example of what you're talking about? This sounds like a complete figment of your imagination. Which maxi is asking daddy Wall Street. Name one!
reply
Saylor, don't tell me he ks not a maxi and that people don't suck his dick all the time. Biggest spook there is.
reply
He is not a maxi. He is Mr. Compliance. If you think he's a maxi then I guess I see what the problem is here.
reply
10 sats \ 5 replies \ @ek 12 May
I agree, this whole post reads like a prime example for selection bias
reply
reply
Just curious, how do you become an anon?
I dont know how to even go further with this lol..
reply
What? I dont think Maxxis wanted the etfs. They are always the ones saying "not your keys, not your coins."
reply
And now they are saying that nobody will be able to use Bitcoin. And it doesn't matter because all that matter is that Bitcoin destroys the evil central banks.
reply
For bitcoin to work, it doesnt have to destroy the banks. I think there is enough room in the world economy for them to coexist! I think many share the same sentiment.
reply
109 sats \ 0 replies \ @rtr 12 May
Very apt comparison with the GNU people. Those are the same exact people that I remember whenever I read a post from a "Bitcoin maximalist."
reply
It's a different perspective but related topic, an old post of mine: Stop Being a Toxic Maximalist... Start Becoming a Friendly Maximalist
reply
You don't name names, but nice rant. It's okay to kill your heroes when they don't serve you anymore. We're all people who get it wrong sometimes. It sounds like you are thinking for yourself, and have your ideals, which I applaud.
reply
I don't like character assassinations.
I really had a lot of people in mind when writing this, and I was going through the saved tweets where some maxis say that "ots doesn't matter that nobody will be able to jse Bitcoin" or that "Liquid is great because you can hold a private key", or calling others idiots for spending sats, etc...
I really don't think they are evil people or anything, but that the whole thing has transformed into something stupid that I, at least, was not able to see coming.
reply
Bruh.
reply
This article confuses Maxis, and Maxis cannot be all alike. The only thing Maxis have in common is that they are against shitcoin.
reply
I'm firmly convinced that without the "maxis" (as you call them) Bitcoin would never be here, SN would not exist. It takes fkng commitment to work on something, push hard, overcome technical issues when the World believes that you're doing something stupid. For years Bitcoin has been something stupid for the general public, only the "maxis" virtue signaling kept stuff together. Other than that, I don't think "maxis" are the issue...the issue is the shitcoining idea to earn more fiat shitcoins with the appreciation of bitcoin price.
PS. Nobody cheered the Ver arrest. If you know someone that did that, you've an issue in your friends circles.
PSS. SoV is strictly related to MoE: if something is SoV than people would be willing to earn it. To earn it someone should give it to you. The only thing I would focus on with this regards is the idea of noKYC-MoE, which is possibly the real issue now. Governments could possibly decide to let us bitcoin, but with full KYC and other orwellian measures...this is the issue. To tackle this we should focus more on adoption at the merchant level, which means that sometimes we should go out and pay with sats, to make the sats flow in the real economy. But SoV is still a key point and does not falsify this concept.
PSSS. Do you have some suggestions mate? What would you do differently? We're all ears.
reply
Bitcoin can still be a method of exchange without having to resort to pruning by default.
Whoever said that number go up was the plot?
reply
deleted by author
reply
I mean when you need to bring up David Gerard and Amy Castor as likeminded people for your position, maybe you are the one that is not looking at it objectively.
You have some valid points but you sound like an unhinged shitcoiner or someone who works for bitcoin magazine.
reply
I'm not saying that they are likeminded people, but that maybe they were right when calling a lot of people out, and for those two to be right you have a be absolutely wrong.
reply
Ok well I am just saying that if you wanted to make these points maybe you should have just made the points rather that whining about laser eye maxis. There is a long history of people griping about laser eye maxis who do so because they see them as an impediment to cultivating more useful idiots to sell their grift to. That's my opinion anyways. It is rare you see an unbiased argument after a laser eye maxi rant.
reply
Not everyone who dislikes the laser eye maxis is a shitcoiner or a troll, most people dislike them, but nobody says anything because it's not worth the time, nobody wants to be the next Vlad or Ray who are being characters assassinated by unreasonable idiots.
reply
The problem is the most influential and prominent voices that attack laser eyed maxis do it on the back of wanting to grift.
Or they are so emotionally invested in their hate of laser eyed maxis that it impairs their ability to make logical, compelling arguments and instead they make ad hominem attacks.
It actually reminds me a lot of trump derangement syndrome to be honest.
reply
deleted by author
reply
We should give preference to our ideas only, we will never lose our plot. There is no harm in killing our heroes if they become our enemy. Enemies are our real wellwisher.
reply
What's a bitcoin maxi?
reply
Bitcoin has its own course. Are maxis just a minority? They may influence less than before. I think Bitcoin Devs are more important.
reply
There this line I wanted to add but I was too late:
When all you have to show for yourself is that you became what you feared the most, somebody who is OK with the status quo and wants nothing to change in order the preserve their wealth: you completely lost the plot and have betrayed yourself.
reply
I'm in favor of spending the sats I accumulate, stack sats and staying humble don't go with me, I prefer to see Bitcoin as P2P money that it was created for.
reply
That's how it should be, that's what Bitcoin was made for, not to enrich people.
reply
I don't think I could have expressed what you just wrote better. GJ True BTC is FOSS and the fact they're on X (formerly known as Twitter) shilling is an indirectly "FU" to that.
reply
Everything he says has been thought about by many Bitcoiners for a long time.
reply
agreed
reply