Bitcoin was forged to be unstoppable In a hostile environment, but we are perfectly clear: survive and flourishing They are two different things. Just because bitcoin Candies Responding to severe political antagonism does not mean that we should Want That antagonism, nor does it mean that we should not do everything possible to encourage a favorable environment that accelerates adoption. Believing otherwise is an incorrect reading of the main ethics. The splendor of Bitcoin is that it remains without permission and decentralized, it doesn’t matter Who He fights him, but this does not prevent us from working to ensure that we have the most advantageous conditions for his long -term success.
In fact, the responses to public policies for regulatory and legislative investigations are constantly reaffirmed These bases: Bitcoin’s strength is Open Source software, self -pity and a wide distribution of mining and nodes operators. In other words, it’s not about getting exhausted. It is a matter of guaranteeing our governments to understand the advantages of Bitcoin’s open design.
There is a difference between “Bitcoin was built for a hostile environment” and “we should Want A hostile environment. “Having an opponents’ resistant architecture does not require that we sit and ignore the opportunities to reduce friction, both in energy policy and in the experience of the daily user. Yes, Bitcoin can and survive if politicians and regulators become hostile. But It is short -sighted to treat hostility as a virtue.
Hostility could slow down adoption, push development offshore or frighten everyday users who are not ready for that level of conflict. In the meantime, the commitment measured with political managers can prevent draconic prohibitions, model a balanced regulation and offer legitimate paths for institutional capital to flowAll of which it can accelerate the global use of Bitcoin. It is not a betrayal of Satoshi’s vision: “We would like Bitcoin prosperous under transparent and right laws”. We want people to choose Bitcoin, they are not forced by some catastrophic breaking of the Legacy system.
There is nothing “un-bitcoin” in encouraging the legislation that protects the rights of people to use and retain their BTC or that support open source development. We should be active in an unpleasant way in these political arenas, because ignoring them will not make them go. It would allow only others, perhaps with Very Different agendas: establish the rules in ways in which it hinders privacy, self -obstacle or innovation setting.
The key remains alert against the compromises that undermine the integrity of the protocol. Building relationships with politicians or regulators does not mean that we are imploring favorable carving at the expense of the resistance to censorship. It simply means that we are making our voices feel. If we see the requests to force the changes to the protocol level that are hostile to users, it is there that we must stand still and say “no” for both practical and ideological reasons. But sharing in a proactive way the way in which Bitcoin mining can stabilize energy networks or how it is the lightning network can provide almost instant payments Not A concession of Bitcoin’s ethics. It is part of a rational strategy to help the public and politicians to understand the true value behind the existence of Bitcoin.
The misleading concerns for the great mining extraction operations that set the regulatory pressure are not new. The reality is that Bitcoin’s design remains resistant to opponents: whoever it can do if they have hardware and energy, e whoever It can perform a complete node to enforce the rules, ensuring that no single miner can change the protocol. If some mining pools bend to censorship requests, other pools are attracted to taxes to include these transactions. This is exactly how Bitcoin is designed: to unstrave the censorship with an anti-Fragile and decentralized architecture.
Ironically, the positive regulatory commitment can reduce Risks of centralization if it opens more states, countries and smaller energy suppliers to host mining structures. The diversity of geography and jurisdiction means that no individual entity or government can easily impose broad rules on the entire network. Once again, the “survival of the hostile environment” does not mean moving away from pragmatic solutions that help to decentralize the hash.
It is true that privacy, scalability and accessibility remain urgent challenges. This is not a proposal: we can Both engage with regulators to avoid a poorly informed policy AND Focus on the advancement of privacy conservation features and downsizing solutions. The key is not to let daily policy overshadow the work that must be done on second level technologies such as the lightning network or more user-friendly privacy solutions.
The developers are actively facing these problems, from the best wallet encryption encrypting the most intuitive lightning. We should defend, publicly and politically, initials that maintain self -pity on the front line and keep third -party custodians optional. Spread the knowledge of “not your keys, not your coins” at the legislative level does not end; It is ensuring that more people (including politicians) actually affirm the fundamental reasons for Bitcoin reasons.
It is easy to look at the ecosystem – full of corporate actors, pressure and theatrical efforts of social media – and to think that he has lost his soul. But Bitcoin has always been full of different voices, many of which take care of short -term profit. This was true in 2011, it was true during the blocks of blocks, and it is true now. He did not destroy Bitcoin. The fundamental robustness of the network guarantees that if you want to keep your keys and validate your transactions, Nobody can stop you.
Bitcoin’s central promise has not evaporated and participation in politics must not mean capitulation. It is simply another stage of Bitcoin’s evolution, in which we actively model a better environment for technology AND The people who benefit from it. We should embrace that combat with all our hearts, defend the foundations of Bitcoin and continue to build towards a future in which the digital money resistant to censorship and peer-to-peer is the global rule, not just an emergency plan for hostile conditions .
This is a post for the guests of Pierre Rochard. The opinions expressed are entirely proper and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.