Join and earn Bitcoin Cash for participation

Busting the myth that the IFP would've prevented the Blockstream takeover

6 269 exc boost
Avatar for noise
Written by   156
1 week ago

This is a narrative that some people use to justify the IFP:

The lack of IFP on Bitcoin was what allowed Blockstream to derail it

But not only wouldn't the IFP have prevented the Blockstream takeover, it will turn ABC into Blockstream 2.0.

Money’s not enough

The idea people got corrupted by Blockstream because they offered money is compelling, and is probably true to some extent. If the developers already had a good salary, they would be less likely to be swayed by outside influence. Again, it makes sense.

But it wouldn't have been enough to save Bitcoin.

Firstly, to sway a greedy person all you have to do is pay more.

Why are there so many corrupt millionaires and billionaires in the world? Because they will always want more money. Even when they've got more money than they could ever hope to spend in several lifetimes, they still want more. So all Blockstream would have to do is to pay a greedy developer more, regardless if any IFP money coming their way.

Secondly, people are motivated by other things than money.

If you value money above all else this might be hard to understand, but it's nevertheless true. Some people are driven by their own morals and they they try to do The Right Thing, as they see it. This is for example why many spies betray their own country despite not getting any money for it.

I'm convinced many of the Blockstream developers, and many of the hardcore 1 MB supporters, truly believe they're doing the right thing. That they follow the anarchistic way and that they will absolutely not be convinced otherwise by the bcash scammers.

It doesn't matter if they're right or wrong. If you try to convince them otherwise, the more they'll believe they're right. And don't even think for a second you can buy them off, that's a sure fire way to lose them forever.

How did Blockstream derail Bitcoin?

But how did Blockstream manage to derail Bitcoin? Why are we still stuck with the 1 MB blocksize limit and how did they convince the community to wait for years for the Lightning Network and suck up large fees and delays?

It’s admittedly a complex topic, but here are some of the important reasons:

  • They unleashed an army of shills that poisoned the debate.

  • They censored important communication channels such as r/bitcoin and the bitcoin-dev mailing list.

  • They chased away big block supporters like Mike Hearn and Gavin Andresen.

  • They controlled the source of Bitcoin Core, the de-facto reference client.

But above all they managed to convince miners to cede to the perceived authority and that they should just do what the Core developers Blockstream wanted. In short the managed to convince the important stakeholders that the reference client dictates the protocol.

To channel my inner Frank Herbert:

He who controls the reference client controls the Bitcoin.

The IFP will make ABC the new Blockstream

In the ultimate irony the IFP will not prevent a future Blockstream, it will instead turn ABC into the very thing they say the IFP would protect against.

Because activating the IFP will cement the fact that ABC can do whatever the hell they want on the chain. They can include any rule they want and take the chain in whatever direction they want. They could even block any change they do not like and turn to Lightning Network Avalanche to solve all the problems.

Exactly like Blockstream, and there's nothing anyone can do about it.

Except of course what the rest of the Bitcoin Cash community are currently doing: We're booting ABC the fuck off our chain and if you care about BCH you should join in.

21
$ 7.66
$ 5.00 from @scotty321
$ 1.00 from @btcfork
$ 0.51 from @georgedonnelly
+ 5
Avatar for noise
Written by   156
1 week ago
Enjoyed this article?  Earn Bitcoin Cash by sharing it! Explain
...and you will also help the author collect more tips.

Comments

So all Blockstream would have to do is to pay a greedy developer more, regardless if any IFP money coming their way.

Secondly, people are motivated by other things than money.

Make up your mind. Is it number one or two? I think it is a combination , but number one is a flawed argument. Of course it could be true and it depends how much more they offer in comparison to how much they were receiving. An IFP might have been enough to keep at least some of the true believers on board.

Maybe you are an anti-Bitcoin troll like Scotty who thinks your article is "Brilliant"? Your conclusion that ABC is turning into Blockstream 2.0 is deeply flawed and probably written for people who want to believe it by the social engineering firms attacking BCH these days. Blockstream is just the fall-guy for an attack that corrupted BTC to keep it from becoming sufficiently decentralized (un-stoppable) peer-to-peer electronic cash for the world's people. That makes them anti-Bitcoin. ABC is clearly pro-Bitcoin and the lies used to make them look like they are anti-Bitcoin are all weak attacks. Sadly, many are willing to believe the lies because it feels so good to hate.

$ 0.00
1 week ago

Is this being translated into Chinese already? May I translate it?

$ 0.00
1 week ago

You're very welcome to!

$ 0.00
5 days ago

Do you want to post the translation or shall I? Ordering it now.

$ 0.00
4 days ago

Nah man, feel free to post it yourself. You're the one to make the translation happen after all.

$ 0.00
2 days ago

Brilliant article. 100% perfect.

$ 0.00
1 week ago