When the FUD starts...
@bottomshelfbtc I don't see why that's FUD. Shouldn't we fight the interpretation of the evidence, and not the existence of (rote, imo) evidence?
Sorry I don't understand what you're asking here. If you're looking for a technical explanation of my viewpoint I have no problem giving that, but rejecting the desire for "equality" as socialist/communist bs is kinda what it boils down to
@bottomshelfbtc yeah, I think we're on the same page. I think it's ok that the distribution is unequal. Lately, bitcoiners have resorted to evidence denial, in lieu of reasoning, and I wasn't sure if that's what you were advocating here.
I'm not saying it's not unequal. I'm saying that people will try to use that against Bitcoin. But the truth is the early miners deserve more. They put in when it was basically nothing. They took a big risk and it paid off. Those who want that redistributed now don't understand property imo.
@402PaymentRequired @bottomshelfbtc Well, the vitalik phenomenon was a combination of things that hit. The entrance of progressive demographics, joe lubin's rather shameless brand of confidence, and the popularity of the 'affected seer' trope. Certainly it had nothing to do with turing complete smart contracts :)