May I ask where you stand on the underlying issue of what Bitcoin's design goal should be? Do you have an opinion on whether it (on-chain transactions) should be an expensive-to-use settlement network or a cheap-to-use payment network? Personally I feel the latter case - direct mass adoption - would be better if it can be technically supported, which I'm not sure about. If mass adoption is not possible I'm left doubting a settlement network alone is viable. That's my current feel on the matter, I'd be interested to hear what you think.
Myself I'd be interested to know why you apparently feel mass adoption of retail consumer is the only way leading to success for Bitcoin?
You do understand we're trying to build an economy and not the next big start-up?
We are at the historic crossroads predicted by Chaum, a binary choice between unprecedented freedom and eternal authoritarianism.
I don't think the XTurds in thrall to Gavin are capable of understanding we're trying to build an economy and not the next big start-up. That limitation is fully intentional:
Aldous Huxley, speaking at U.C. Berkeley in 1962, outlines his vision for the ultimate revolution, a scientific dictatorship where people will be conditioned to enjoy their servitude, and will pose little opposition to the ruling oligarchy, as he puts it. He also takes a moment to compare his book, Brave New World, to George Orwells 1984 and considers the technique in the latter too outdated for actual implementation.
There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears
they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution.
About that last quote, I havent read Huxley Brave New World but, I have read 1984 and its a brutal book, is BNW really that bad?