We need to rethink "Bitcoin only" as a purity test. Multiple...

Raw JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "f9b1a71b77f6fae0244e521e10a1dfebd47393d7a370b7f06cde1705dafe6a68",
  "pubkey": "12ee03d11684a125dd87be879c28190415be3f3b1eca6b4ed743bd74ffd880e6",
  "created_at": 1785709226,
  "tags": [],
  "content": "We need to rethink \"Bitcoin only\" as a purity test. Multiple things recently have reminded me of this issue, not just the ColdCard hack.\n\nIf you *genuinely* understand the tech, and the economics, and all that other stuff, you can come to the conclusion that Bitcoin will win. That you should put all your wealth in it, and you should help out with freedom tech if you can\n\nBut things aren't so easy for people who don't really *understand* it all. They have to go on faith a lot. I've had just one long face-to-face conversation with a BIP-110 supporter. Very nice older man, but he knew essentially nothing about how Bitcoin worked. He had put all his life savings into Bitcoin, but he was very stressed and said he'd have to sell if BIP-110 didn't activate.\n\nMy point there isn't to (yet again!) criticize a BIP-110 supporter. He kept using the word \"conviction\", and that his \"conviction\" was being tested. It's like a religious person talking about \"faith\"\n\nHe was Bitcoin-only (on the face of it), but only because it was an article of faith for him and because he copied the opinions of people smarter than him.\n\nIf we try to bully people to take \"Bitcoin only\" as an article of faith, then it becomes a meaningless slogan. And it can become harmful because it means that people can't ask the hard questions that challenge Bitcoin. And if people are Bitcoin-only as an article of faith, and not because they've actually learned about it, then I don't think that does anybody any good",
  "sig": "aac9ad486477ed5b18f30c79503d8a829e242fa590e2a49f713b3d25bd221006120b644cb4cea8f55b87e0823a1131e48aa5e37a59ac267a44d8683b00159a87"
}