-
@ Jaxon Miles
2025-06-11 06:35:08
I totally and whole heartedly disagree with the "if you dont like core then fork off" mentality. That is not what makes bitcoin decentralized. What makes bitcoin decentralized is not having to agree with Core, not having to run their software while still remaining on chain.
If you create an ecosystem where if anyone disagrees with Core, they have to fork off, you've created an ecosystem where the Core team is the central authority of Bitcoin. Core is not Bitcoin, we are Bitcoin.
Regardless of whether you are in favor of the recent merge, the fact that they went against their ethos of never merging controversial PRs, this should concern you. Its only a matter of time until they decide to push something you dont like, and I dont think you should be told to fork off for disagreeing. You and I both know very well that even if a fork were to be objectibely better, it would not succeed because of Bitcoins network effect so its a nonargument.
Bitcoin is not decentralized if Cores word is final and all who disagree must fork off. That is absolutely no different from Vitalik saying ETH is not proof of stake, and all the plebs running the old version or mining eth are now on a different chain, deciding for everyone that PoS is the nee and official ethereum. It is no different if we create an ecosystem where Cores word is law and all those opposed must fork off.
I should clarify this has little to do with the content of the merge itself, but more so the act itself of pushing it, along with their totally unconcerned attitude coming off as though they really don't care whether or not Bitcoin succeeds because they got their check and thats all that matters has given me a bad taste, so its nice knowing that their are alternatives to Core while remaining on chain.
I dont even care if its the exact current code copy pasted, so long as its not managed by the current Core team.