Overnight, BTC (Bitcoin) slightly rebounded to around the 5-day moving average of 67.7k. In the internal reference of Jiaolian on May 31st, “US Core Inflation Slows, Favorable Loose Monetary Policy Implemented” [link], Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin (V God) published a long article on his reflections on the Bitcoin block war.
The topic he talked about is naturally well-known, the community war on Bitcoin scalability that erupted in 2017-2018. That intense conflict led to a division within the community, with a small group of people supporting the so-called “big blocks” causing a split and hard forking into BCH (Bitcoin Cash). The community was divided, and the bull market peaked. Afterwards, in the second half of 2018, the notorious imposter “Faketoshi” on BCH hard forked again and created the so-called BSV (Bitcoin Satoshi Vision). The market crashed, entering the “Valley of Death” at the end of 2018.
Countless cryptocurrency investors were swept up in this historical torrent, deceived by the “grand narrative” of BCH and even BSV, selling off BTC and going all-in on these forked coins, paying for their own understanding and “ideals”. Now, after six years, I wonder if the “graveyard grass” of many “traitors” has grown two meters high.
Wu Jihan, who carried the banner of BCH separatism, has lost his Bitmain. Craig Wright, who promoted BSV through deception, has been ruled a fraud by the court and is facing global fines.
Vitalik, who intended to expand BTC’s programming capabilities but was rejected, left and started Ethereum (ETH), and still continues to talk about the “failure” of Bitcoin.
Only the bagholders who heavily invested in them and lagged behind BTC are in disarray. Some of these disoriented bagholders have developed Stockholm Syndrome and now speak highly of these coins, deceiving themselves and others.
Character determines destiny, and cognition determines wealth. The character of the elite has changed the fate of millions, and the cognition of the elite has influenced the wealth of thousands.
Vitalik’s arrogance and prejudice will undoubtedly make all the people who believe in him pay the price.
The ones who have to support are the “pre-miners” during the initial coin offering, the “foundation” that constantly sells at high prices, the “big capital” that earns interest through staking in PoS, and more…
ETH has never had a stable token economic model, let alone a “century-long plan” with a strict, concise, and elegant issuance formula like BTC.
{image}
Because Vitalik and the Ethereum Foundation, in fact, monopolize the most important “weapon” of the entire Ethereum ecosystem – hard forks.
In Jiaolian’s view, the hard forks that dominate Ethereum are the most important power that Vitalik wants to defend with this article, under the guise of objective neutrality and slight bias towards supporting big blocks.
For this reason, he does not hesitate to strongly oppose the cautious principles of Bitcoin core developers in the past, and even opposes the technical values of “soft forks are better than hard forks”.
By monopolizing the power of Ethereum’s hard forks, the noble reason on the surface is to continuously improve technology, but the hidden motive is to control and arbitrarily change the issuance rules of ETH – you guessed it right, perhaps this is also the real reason why Vitalik and the foundation have never officially clarified the issuance model of ETH, and it seems that they have no intention of learning from BTC’s fixed and unchanging model.
“As long as I control a country’s currency issuance, I don’t care who makes the laws.” – Mayer Amschel Rothschild
In his article, the knowledgeable and talented Vitalik talks extensively about the prisoner’s dilemma model in game theory, but he does not mention in it that in the textbook “Game Theory”, it clearly states that a higher level of certainty in monetary policy has better economic efficiency.
All of Bitcoin’s technology is designed to defend its unchanging monetary model for centuries. Ethereum has done so many cool technologies just to defend its monopoly and dictatorship over hard forks and currency issuance.
To emphasize the noble reason of “technological improvement”, Vitalik even directly wrote a section in his article called “Less Conflict, More Technology” to criticize Bitcoin’s lack of innovation.
He wrote: The ultimate diffuser of political tension is not compromise, but rather new technology.
He questions Bitcoin: One key question for Bitcoin going forward is, will Bitcoin be able to become a tech-forward ecosystem?
He uses technological supremacy to reject his so-called “Saylorism” (presumably to ridicule the maximalism of MicroStrategy founder Michael Saylor). He claims that approving an ETF for ETH in the US will cause the death of Saylorism and make people realize that Bitcoin needs to improve its technology.
Jiaolian couldn’t help but laugh. A group of people who pretended to advocate decentralization and resistance to censorship actually used the approval of the US regulatory agency SEC to endorse their orthodoxy, rationality, and weapons to attack the Bitcoin community. It is truly ridiculous.
Although Jiaolian is also a technical person, he never believes in so-called technism.
“This is the so-called ‘weapon-only theory’, a mechanistic view of the problem, a subjective and one-sided opinion. Our opinion is the opposite of this, not only seeing weapons, but also seeing human power. Weapons are an important factor in war, but not the decisive factor. The decisive factor is people, not things.” – Mao Zedong, “On Protracted War,” May 1938
After six years, Vitalik is trying to reverse the narrative for big blocks. He criticizes the segwit technology, which made it possible for soft forks to scale, calming the debate at the time and quickly shifting to support the segwit scaling solution and abandoning the hard fork scaling solution. But Vitalik argues in his article that hard forks are simpler and better for increasing block size.
He even cited the forum statements of Bitcoin’s founder Satoshi Nakamoto to support his argument for hard fork scaling. It’s somewhat comical for someone who opposes Bitcoin to use the words of Bitcoin’s creator to endorse their own views. This is similar to how Craig Wright claims to be the true heir of Satoshi Nakamoto’s ideology and accuses Bitcoin core developers of being revisionists.
But in his article, he “pretends” not to see the current adoption rate of segwit, which is over 95%.
{image}
Vitalik also sighed and lamented that the big block camp was “incompetent” in terms of technical research and development. He indirectly acknowledges a historical fact, that the people who advocated separatism and hard forked for big blocks at the time were not technically competent and constantly made mistakes, losing the trust of the people.
But he wants to misinterpret this fact and make a wrong historical reflection. He doesn’t see the objective impracticality of unlimited big blocks, but attributes its failure to the technical incompetence of the big block advocates. This is a talk of idealism, not historical materialism.
Vitalik even uses the traditional art of “inventing intimidating jargon” to reverse the incompetence of the betrayers and create a cool phrase called the “one-sided competence trap”.
Well, General Douglas MacArthur would exclaim, “Wow!” when he sees this! So, the incompetence of the big block camp that advocated separatism is all blamed on the other side, the Bitcoin core developers who support small blocks, for being too competent in Bitcoin development! Thus, it becomes “one-sided competence” instead of both sides being competent. Vitalik gives a qualitative judgment, which is very bad, it’s a “trap”! Oh, my classmates!
He says that because of this one-sided competence, Bitcoin has fallen into “authoritarianism”. Criticizing Bitcoin for falling into authoritarianism is to whitewash the dictatorship of Ethereum, isn’t it?
Don’t they see that it’s because the talented people who are more rational and objective have made the correct “stand” and historical “choice” by surpassing the original Bitcoin maintainers? Does Vitalik know what people’s hearts and popular sentiment are? If it wasn’t for the incompetence and the display of speculation and separatism by the big block camp, why couldn’t they attract more talented people than the original Bitcoin maintainers?
Because it is not popular and cannot attract talent, it is not competent. They insist on saying that it is because they are not competent and cannot produce good things that they have lost popular support. Isn’t this turning cause and effect upside down, isn’t it distorting reality?
Deep down, those who believe that the masses create history are more likely to accept the former narrative logic (people’s historical view). Those who believe that the elite create history will attribute everything to the latter narrative logic (elite historical view). What Vitalik cleverly argues is the narrative logic of the latter elitism.
The narrative of elite historical view is the narrative of the capitalist ruling class. The people are just a mob and must be used and supported by the elites. Without capitalists, who will pay workers’ wages? Is it the workers who work overtime and make excessive profits to support the capitalists, or is it the capitalists who give workers wages and support them?
Therefore, we can clearly see that Vitalik is deeply trapped in the mainstream ideology of this era, while Satoshi Nakamoto is beyond the present era.
The Ethereum and Bitcoin created by their thoughts, which have completely different fundamental colors, are not products of the same era and the same level at all.
For Vitalik, who is trying to bring back the spirit of big block scaling, he will only vigorously deny and oppose an objective fact when it comes to whether “miners” should dominate hard forks: that sufficient consensus among miners can implement a hard fork.
Why? Because Vitalik and the Ethereum Foundation have used various means, including the difficulty bomb, including propagating the so-called “orthodoxy,” to intellectually and ideologically hijack the miner community, firmly grasping the power to dominate hard forks in the hands of the foundation.
On the one hand, they promote that hard forks are good, and on the other hand, they are always vigilant against other forces seizing power. This is a distorted mentality of feudal “imperial power”. In order to monopolize the dominant power of hard forks and then control the currency issuance, they can be described as going to any lengths, just like feudal emperors who hold the power of life and death and cannot sleep peacefully.
Vitalik may be a comrade with pure thoughts and no desire for power. However, when Ethereum started with pre-mined tokens and ICO financing, and when Ethereum implemented PoS staking, he and the leaders of Ethereum had already introduced the ghost of capitalism into Ethereum. Once this ghost enters, it will parasitize everyone’s mind, blood, and bones, and can never be removed.
And all of Vitalik’s statements, on the surface, may be what he wants to say, but in fact, they are just endorsements for this ghost. On the surface, he talks about technology, but in reality, he defends the fundamental interests of this ghost, which is the monopoly and control over the issuance and currency control of Ethereum through the dominance of hard forks. He defends, explains, and whitewashes the ultimate power of this ghost.
However, we should still believe that the eyes of the people are clear. History will eventually give its fair judgment.
[1]
https://vitalik.eth.limo/general/2024/05/31/blocksize.html
(WeChat Official Account: Liu Jiaolian; Knowledge Planet: Reply “Planet” to the official account)
(Disclaimer: The content of this article does not constitute any investment advice. Cryptocurrencies are highly risky assets with the risk of losing everything at any time. Please participate with caution and take responsibility for yourself.)
Tags:
Vitalik Buterin
Ethereum
Liu Jiaolian
Investment Insights
Bitcoin
Essays
Source link:
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/jDJC6YC_qUUZPmg-7qcgvw
Note: All articles by Bitpush represent only the author’s point of view and do not constitute investment advice.
Original article link: https://www.bitpush.news/articles/6836991
Related news
Bitdeer May Mining News: Tether’s Huge Investment, Riot’s Acquisition Plan for BitFarms, Canaan’s New Model, etc.
Ten-Year Pact #24: First Battle Won, Successful Withdrawal! First-year ROI of 64%
Wu Shuo Zhou’s Selection: Mt.GOX Massive Transfer, ETH ETF Potentially Launching by the End of June, Babylon Raises $70 Million in Investment, and Top 10 News
Finding Catalysts for the Bull Market: Crypto Consumer Applications
[Bitpush Daily Market News] BTC Continues to Consolidate, Future Trends Depend on the Fed