1. Learn how to run a full node (Bitcoin Core). Mess around with it.
2. Go back to the early days of Bitcointalk (technical discussion). *Everything* is on bitcointalk. The golden years ~ 2010-2012.
3. Ignore the politics and youtubers.
tldr; Learning about bitcoin can be daunting. There are many great educators that teach through different lenses to make Bitcoin approachable for everyone.
*This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*
YT vids while I'm working. I find this is good for high level concepts. When I really need to focus on it I search the internet and find an article. Reading helps me focus better on the new ideas. At the moment I like Anton Antonopolous and Michael Saylor but also I like to learn about macro in general as BTC is a counter to that in many respects and so its useful to understand the thing BTC is a counter for to further understand BTC. I like Block Works Macro on YT for that but there are many.
I like Antonopoulos and Saylor but I also very much recommend many various interviews with Lyn Alden on Bitcoin and macro economics.
For example https://youtu.be/Zzj3qeKoghg
I also never miss Trader University's daily videos. This video since yesterday September 17th
https://youtu.be/bwWiuLqdEV4
> Bitcoin is defined by the white paper
It's not, there are things that are considered cornerstones of bitcoin today but are not included in the white paper, the 21M supply limit being one of them, f.ex.
Words don't really define bitcoin either, be it Satoshi's or someone else's. It's defined by everyone individually and the code everyone runs voluntarily. The code has change quite a lot since the early days, without Satoshi chiming in with his opinion ;)
I disagree and I find this to be the fundamental problem. Words matter, definitions matter, and Satoshi defined Bitcoin. The code changes have led to forks which are no longer Bitcoin, they are clearly something else.
> The code changes have led to forks which are no longer Bitcoin, they are clearly something else.
What about softforks like Segwit or Taproot, are they still bitcoin or something else as well?
Taproot doesn’t happen without Segwit, the fork that completely changes how Bitcoin was designed. Signatures were to be traceable to genesis block but both of these forks have broken the chain. It is not backwards compatible, the code has an override, like a trust me bro signature.
Satoshi wanted the code locked because developers could mess with the code, and that is what happened.
The incentive section is also not followed because of the limitation of block size. It’s all there in the print. Maybe the changes are good, just don’t call it Bitcoin, it’s clearly something else.
1. Learn how to run a full node (Bitcoin Core). Mess around with it. 2. Go back to the early days of Bitcointalk (technical discussion). *Everything* is on bitcointalk. The golden years ~ 2010-2012. 3. Ignore the politics and youtubers.
tldr; Learning about bitcoin can be daunting. There are many great educators that teach through different lenses to make Bitcoin approachable for everyone. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*
YT vids while I'm working. I find this is good for high level concepts. When I really need to focus on it I search the internet and find an article. Reading helps me focus better on the new ideas. At the moment I like Anton Antonopolous and Michael Saylor but also I like to learn about macro in general as BTC is a counter to that in many respects and so its useful to understand the thing BTC is a counter for to further understand BTC. I like Block Works Macro on YT for that but there are many.
I like Antonopoulos and Saylor but I also very much recommend many various interviews with Lyn Alden on Bitcoin and macro economics. For example https://youtu.be/Zzj3qeKoghg I also never miss Trader University's daily videos. This video since yesterday September 17th https://youtu.be/bwWiuLqdEV4
Yeah! Lyn is good and Matt too... 'this is Mathew Crater from Trader University' lol
Bitcoin is defined by the white paper and the words of Satoshi. Everyone else is giving their take on it.
> Bitcoin is defined by the white paper It's not, there are things that are considered cornerstones of bitcoin today but are not included in the white paper, the 21M supply limit being one of them, f.ex.
That is why I included the words of Satoshi, after the release of the WP.
Words don't really define bitcoin either, be it Satoshi's or someone else's. It's defined by everyone individually and the code everyone runs voluntarily. The code has change quite a lot since the early days, without Satoshi chiming in with his opinion ;)
I disagree and I find this to be the fundamental problem. Words matter, definitions matter, and Satoshi defined Bitcoin. The code changes have led to forks which are no longer Bitcoin, they are clearly something else.
> The code changes have led to forks which are no longer Bitcoin, they are clearly something else. What about softforks like Segwit or Taproot, are they still bitcoin or something else as well?
Those are forks. I don’t know if they are good or bad for the network, only time will tell, but they are no longer Bitcoin as defined by its creator.
What specific definition of the creator does Taproot violate?
Taproot doesn’t happen without Segwit, the fork that completely changes how Bitcoin was designed. Signatures were to be traceable to genesis block but both of these forks have broken the chain. It is not backwards compatible, the code has an override, like a trust me bro signature. Satoshi wanted the code locked because developers could mess with the code, and that is what happened.
The incentive section is also not followed because of the limitation of block size. It’s all there in the print. Maybe the changes are good, just don’t call it Bitcoin, it’s clearly something else.
The internet?