[2022-07-14] Nic Carter vs. The Bitcoin Maximalists - page 2.

bbc.reporter

legendary

Activity: 3122

Merit: 1492

Quote from: Lucius on July 15, 2022, 05:36:18 AM

@bbc.reporter, I don't think that such individuals are important for Bitcoin, at least not in the long term and in the big picture.

I very much agree. I am only saying that the bitcoin community has lost a very intelligent man who has been making good arguments for why bitcoin should adopted by much of the people in the world. Many of his arguments are very much similar to Andreas Antonopolous.

It also appears the bitcoin maximalists are pushing away some of the smart people and support those people who are willing to continue the circle jerk. We should be more careful because this might be the community's own undoing.

stompix

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 6403

Blackjack.fun

Quote from: bbc.reporter on July 13, 2022, 10:05:12 PM

In any case, the bitcoin community lost a smart man when it went against Nic Carter.
~
Source https://www.coindesk.com/layer2/2022/07/06/nic-carter-and-the-case-for-bitcoin-mediumism/

This is funny, an article on Coindesk, for which Carter is an author and investor describes his fight and why maximalists are wrong.
Nic carter was a shitcoin lover from the start, and his Dynamic investors have nothing to do with anything related to bitcoin, he tried to enter a war on Twitter and tried to debunk stuff only digging his hole deeper when it turned out that most of his investments had only to do with hype and centralized solutions.

Seriously, he acted like a kid who was losing subscribers on Twitter, having that kind of attitude while bragging about millions of investments sounded to everyone like the last moments of Do Kwon. If you're preaching how you love bitcoin and cryptos and what they stand for and you deal with Palantir...

Quote from: bbc.reporter on July 14, 2022, 08:33:37 PM

Yes this is a problem because much of the community only knows and listens to Max Keisler and Michael Saylor and consider them as something similar to leaders of the community.

The problem is labeling people, and you're doing the same here.
I'm a bitcoin maximalist and a hardcore shitcoin hater, and I don't think there was a week in which I didn't make a fund of Saylor laser eyes or about how Bukele is buying the dip every single time, only for the price to go down after. Real bitcoin maximalists don't give a damn about individuals, you've mistaken a horde of wanna-be millionaires who don't care what and how it makes them rich for bitcoiners.

Lucius

legendary

Activity: 3234

Merit: 5637

Blackjack.fun-Free Raffle-Join&Win $50🎲

@bbc.reporter, I don't think that such individuals are important for Bitcoin, at least not in the long term and in the big picture. What they say or do can have a short-term impact on people who think that Bitcoin needs central figures and that its fate depends on them. This has never been the case, nor will it be in the future, and we really do not need to have any kind of leaders - and even Saylor should not be placed in that role, because he is first and foremost a businessman, and not any kind of leader who should have an influence on that whether someone wants to invest in Bitcoin or not.

I don't listen to any of them in the sense that I'm obsessed with what they say, and everything I see and hear comes from this forum. People should be a little more intelligent and think for themselves, not just rely on the opinion of other people, regardless of who it was.

bbc.reporter

legendary

Activity: 3122

Merit: 1492

@Lucius. Yes this is a problem because much of the community only knows and listens to Max Keisler and Michael Saylor and consider them as something similar to leaders of the community. However, when you listen to them speak, they only extend the bitcoin maximalism circle jerk preaching like this is a religion. It is head shaking why many people listen to them.

In any case, I am not saying you are part of those people.

Lucius

legendary

Activity: 3234

Merit: 5637

Blackjack.fun-Free Raffle-Join&Win $50🎲

This is the first time I'm hearing about this man, and by his appearance I would say that he is a young person who, like many others like him, is just trying to profit by pretending to know something more than other people. If he is some kind of intellectual who abandons the ship, let him feel free to take other like-minded people with him - because Bitcoin survived without its founder and people like Hal Finney, and I'm sure it can survive without one philosopher who should stick to what he studied at university, which is Philosophy and International Relations.

Maybe this man means something to you, but for 99% of people on this forum, he is completely irrelevant, as are the projects in which he participates.

bbc.reporter

legendary

Activity: 3122

Merit: 1492

How is bitcoin maximalism presently taken by everyone in bitcointalk? Is it still strong or is it beginning to become weaker after 10 years?

In any case, the bitcoin community lost a smart man when it went against Nic Carter. I do not agree with all of his arguments, however, he is certainly one of the best representatives for bitcoin with arguements based on reality. Many people might disagree but he is certainly smarter than Max Keisler.

The fight began when Carter and his fund, Castle Island Ventures, announced an equity investment in a start-up called Dynamic. Dynamic is building a wallet-based platform with decentralized identity features, one of the most interesting applications of Web3 technology.

The problem is that Dynamic is multichain. For self-declared bitcoin maximalists, this amounts to heresy. That’s almost literal, as we’ll get into, because bitcoin maximalism possesses many features of a religion – and maxis were under the impression Carter was one of them.

Source https://www.coindesk.com/layer2/2022/07/06/nic-carter-and-the-case-for-bitcoin-mediumism/

Topic: [2022-07-14] Nic Carter vs. The Bitcoin Maximalists - page 2. (Read 554 times)