Don't bother, seems like it's written with ChatGPT, just like his financial advice and planning!
BIP 110 is pure garbage but some of the arguments Saylor has are not arguments at all:
-Known use cases are not the full design space. The proposal says it preserves all known monetary use cases. Innovation is defined by what is not yet known.
-Temporary consensus code is still consensus code. It must be specified, implemented, reviewed, tested, deployed, monitored, and later retired.
-Evasion may make transactions less efficient. Fragmented or obfuscated encodings can consume more structure and complicate analysis without eliminating the underlying demand.
- A contentious restriction should demand greater confidence, not less. Temporary duration does not make coordination failure harmless.
This is just another load of garbage AI slop!
Here is the text for it if you really want to waste your time on a rainy day>
https://pastebin.com/zSm8R6JsThank you for that, often users forget to include the contents of the post that they are linking to directly here. It seems rather quite unconvincing and useless to include so many AI slop reasons. It would have been better if he came up with 5 or 10 real reasons than for him to make this very long list of AI slop reasons.
8. It actually increases rather than reduces legal and regulatory risks.
By attempting to filter "bad" data it actually invites more regulatory pressure - if government authorities believe that Bitcoin can be changed by pressuring a few entities, they will almost certainly try to do so. Neutrality protects the network - selective censorship doesn't.
That is a really good point, and that is definitely what would happen! Some people that react fearful and focus on the short term forget that many times what might seem good in the short term is very bad in the long term. If something like this is successful one day, then Bitcoin will become a shitcoin and will be controlled by many entities. If you can regulate and filter some types of transactions, then that invites the regulation of every kind of transaction. As long as the network is netural, there will be no kind of filtering. They can only do that on centralized platforms and that is fine in the current system because we don't have to use them.
I don't care what a rich oligarch thinks is good or bad and it should not be important for anybody else either. It doesn't matter if what they say is correct or not, they are just celebrities seeking attention to fill their own pockets with fiat.
I also don't need 110 reasons, I only need one. BIP-110 is bad because it does not seek majority support to activate a major change in the protocol and that is against Bitcoin principles. We need to get past that major flaw before we can even begin discussing the rest.
Saylor is not an oligarch, and this is a very irrational perspective to be had which should not be agreed with. In most cases we should only listen to what people are saying and judge the words that are being said, regardless of who says them. It would be very irrational to dismiss the words of someone just because they are rich and you can't accept that you are not rich as they are. They may be speaking the complete truth, but you would choose to not listen due to your emotions. That is a very bad stance to have.
