Control-Plane Capital -- 175d [root] [-]
|    The whole Bitcoin development process is so broken that non-technical plebs with full-time jobs have to try to
|    become technical to understand how badly they've been getting fucked by Bitcoin's developers.
|    
|    The only way out is to at least define:
|    - what it is you're changing (freedom money, distributed, permissionless database, etc),
|    - what is changeable on layer 1 (if anything),
|    - in which cases are these things changeable.
|    
|    The more you change the protocol for the worse, the less of an option not changing the protocol becomes because
|    you have to change the changes.
|    
|    It's kind of funny to see people comparing Bitcoin's L1 to TCP/IP. Have you seen the Releases tab of the default
|    implementation on GitHub ( https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases ). These guys are shipping.
|    
|    Development-Process Capture = Perimeter Control
|    
|    You don't have to "hack" Bitcoin's consensus rules to influence how the network behaves.
|    You can steer what gets relayed, mined, or socially accepted by quietly shaping the development process — who
|    gets funded, who reviews changes, which features become defaults, how releases are timed, and how communication
|    is framed.
|    
|    Most probably know this, but governments want to maintain monopoly on force + money issuance.
|    
|    Fiat is the ultimate control layer -> no major government defects from this system.
|    
|    So governments don't like Bitcoin (as MoE) very much.
|    
|    If you expect for governments to come out and try to ban Bitcoin, don't because that's not how the system works.
|    
|    Systems don't rely on bans; they use knobs — adjustable defaults, standards, and processes that subtly guide
|    behavior.
|    The Bitcoin development process is a dense cluster of such knobs.
|    
|    Open source ≠ immune
|    
|    Control flows through funding, maintainers, policy defaults, and release cadence.
|    
|    There are probably less than a 100 people in the world who have game theory studied:
|    - the development process control surfaces — where steering actually happens
|    - what capture looks like
|    - how capture changes outcomes
|    - why the development process is the preferred perimeter to attack
|    
|    I'll just go over the last one because it is quite short.
|    
|    Why the development process is the preferred perimeter to attack:
|    
|    - Cheaper than legislation: Defaults and "safety" framing do the enforcement work.
|    - Plausible deniability: "We're just improving performance".
|    - Asymmetric impact: hits sovereign users hardest; institutional wrappers unaffected.
|    
|    If you require people to be technical for them to be able to protect their savings, this project fails.
|    
|    From the outside looking in, this project is starting to look more and more like Ethereum.
|    
|    Developers are gonna wanna develop and if they are allowed, they'll develop Bitcoin into a centralized shitcoin.
|    reply