brianchoffman

They aped the name.
We built the chain.
LFG. 🧱🦍

LIVE: BTC ALL-IN SUMMIT | Bitcoin Programmability Unleashed! https://www.youtube.com/live/LTiQKQ5Ars0?si=Pd4hfDOBVDPh0099 via @YouTube

It might be plausible that funding for Bitcoin Core and other clients is low because of lack of functional expansion. I mean there’s clearly money to be invested in new ideas. Maybe no one is interested in funding ossification.

I’m pretty sure that’s not a buzz word in pitch decks.

Bitcoin has survived on the notion that it’s focused. Doesn’t waver from the mission. OP_RETURN left open the door to something beyond basic functionality. We kicked the can down the road regarding programmability thinking no one would succeed.

It feels like Lightning was an acceptable side mission that wouldn’t destroy Bitcoin, but now Runes/Ordinals/etc are challenging that position.

Now OP_RETURN is topic du jour. Why? Manufactured outrage. It’s good to have alternative Bitcoin implementations. We used libbitcoin early on and supported. You should choose the build you trust.

This whole situation has me tied in #BitcoinKnots

The OP_RETURN discussion is a hugely important one. Some thoughts. https://www.blog.arch.network/the-op_return-debate-and-why-arch-makes-it-unnecessary/