TheGuySwann on Nostr: Satoshi gave numerous hand-wavey responses to this problem because it simply was a ...

Satoshi gave numerous hand-wavey responses to this problem because it simply was a seriously difficult problem. He also mentioned light silent verification, which we never developed a way to prove the whole cahin that way, only the presence of certain UTXOs.

Then it was literally the blockszie war itself that taught us that miners could be adversaries without desiring to kill bitcoin itself, but control decisions around it. In addition, Satoshi's entire corpus of conversation occurred at a time when there was *no separation* between nodes and miners. It was one piece of software. Huge pools where miners only hash and dont even run nodes or produce their own blocks, present a far more dangerous and critical lesson on the assumptions of miner risks and incentives.

To simply ignore everything we have learned and the huge shifts in software, hardware and infrastructure to pull a random comment from Satoshi where he just responds with "we can probably just make blocks bigger" as some gospel that decides all technical and future decisions around Bitcoin regardless of any and allevents and lessons int he future is just lazy, or dishonest.

Importantly I'm not calling you lazy or dishonest, I'm talking about those who grasp onto this as a tool to avoid any and all other conversation or exploration of the problem and its many, varied, trade off ridden solutions.

Respect that you recognize what you've heard and what you haven't explored. Regardless of whatever conclusion you reach in time.