Quote from: cAPSLOCK on January 17, 2020, 03:19:00 AM

I have some interesting/paranoid speculation... It takes a moment to get to Monero... but hang with me.

I know my opinions on BTC forks might be different than some of my Monero brothers, and for full disclosure I believe BCH is misguided at best, and an all out scammy attack at worst, and BSV is an absolute abomination from any perspective. I think the idea of the metanet, although fascinating, is something that will destroy the cypherpunk vision of Bitcoin. I think the correct way to achieve the metanet ideals is to run it as an opt in sidechain on Bitcoin. The reason I think storing all kinds of data on the Bitcoin blockchain is a bad idea is it will necessarily centralize not only the miners, but also the fully validating nodes, which is a distinction with it's own essay, but not this one.

Storing virtually unlimited data on the blockchain will require both exponentially gigantic troves of data storage space, as well as the very fastest internet bandwidth, AND enormous CPU power for validation. This will re-collapse the fully validating nodes with the miners and render those entities to be businesses on the size of FAANG, or nation states.

In the end a relatively small group of node operators (For example USA, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, China, Russia, and maybe 5-6 more) would then control ALL the "distributed" (but no longer effectively decentralized) copies of the blockchain. They could then form a cabal that could then set the monetary policy of the new world digital currency.

I know... Kinda paranoid.

But if that is not what happens with BSV then what is it?

I don't want to argue in vain and trigger feelings with this post, I just want to talk logically and rationnally about an interesting subject.

Regarding BSV, what you skectch as a scenario (Metanet ending in a centrally controled) is only an hypothesis, a speculation, a possibility. No one will know for sure until this has been tried.
Maybe this will end up centrally controled, maybe not. I suggest you framing that as an experiment. The same way Bitcoin was framed as an experiment until 2014. Let's look at what's going to happen, and I am personally grateful that some people carry out this project.

Regarding CSW, who cares? This a protocol, it's only the code that matter.
Do you remember the early days of Bitcoin when people said that knowing the personality of Satoshi was irrelevant to the Bitcoin project? The same goes for BSV. This is a protocol, which such be judged as such. Rationally, gossips about personalities should be irrelevant.