That's a common sentiment, but it has one critical flaw: It perpetuates the incorrect conclusion that Bitcoin's success is a given.
The Bitcoin network relies on nodes and miners, and both of these MUST be decentralized. If either one becomes centralized (with mining being most at risk of this at the moment) then it's checkmate for the state; Bitcoin would be worthless, though people will not recognize this all at once.
Bitcoin has survived all attacks thus far only because it has remained decentralized *enough*.
Decentralization requires people, like you and I, to run a Bitcoin node that reflects the rules which govern that Bitcoin is. The subtle implication here is that if a node implementation ever changes in such at way that it no longer reflects what you believe Bitcoin should be, then you must be willing and able to switch to a different node implementation to reenforce what you believe are the correct rules.
The above is a concrete example that's relevant at this point in time, but the point is that for Bitcoin to win:
- There needs to be enough people running nodes and mining with their own block templates (because this is what maintains bitcoin's censorship resistance).
- These nodes must be carefully maintained, otherwise a sneeky attack may actually be successful and undermine Bitcoin.
- People must use Bitcoin, both for saving and spending.
Bitcoin CAN win, but it requires our unwavering support/investment to do so.
Emmanuel
npub10g…8fnu0
2026-07-12 15:20:16 UTC
in reply to nevent1q…rzht
Author Public Key
npub10gxsvd0mr2lvkkf4y4gjutu0f3tjl8kkntj4x6ent9dysqraudesj8fnu0Seen on
wss://nostr-01.yakihonne.comPublished at
2026-07-12 15:20:16 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "3e9251f63cd6438ad78a5c599071da03603bfa00501549b30adea2db72b4e70a",
"pubkey": "7a0d0635fb1abecb593525512e2f8f4c572f9ed69ae5536b33595a48007de373",
"created_at": 1783869616,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"10b6660cb0754bfb89265475d7678359ef45ec52778d14261d17d0d3cb5507df"
],
[
"e",
"4cc965f18e01489feafc02afc12c767f7e58bb1e7061c165e1d4dc092f258bc9",
"wss://relay.damus.io/",
"root",
"10b6660cb0754bfb89265475d7678359ef45ec52778d14261d17d0d3cb5507df"
]
],
"content": "That's a common sentiment, but it has one critical flaw: It perpetuates the incorrect conclusion that Bitcoin's success is a given.\n\nThe Bitcoin network relies on nodes and miners, and both of these MUST be decentralized. If either one becomes centralized (with mining being most at risk of this at the moment) then it's checkmate for the state; Bitcoin would be worthless, though people will not recognize this all at once.\n\nBitcoin has survived all attacks thus far only because it has remained decentralized *enough*.\n\nDecentralization requires people, like you and I, to run a Bitcoin node that reflects the rules which govern that Bitcoin is. The subtle implication here is that if a node implementation ever changes in such at way that it no longer reflects what you believe Bitcoin should be, then you must be willing and able to switch to a different node implementation to reenforce what you believe are the correct rules.\n\nThe above is a concrete example that's relevant at this point in time, but the point is that for Bitcoin to win:\n\n- There needs to be enough people running nodes and mining with their own block templates (because this is what maintains bitcoin's censorship resistance).\n- These nodes must be carefully maintained, otherwise a sneeky attack may actually be successful and undermine Bitcoin.\n- People must use Bitcoin, both for saving and spending.\n\nBitcoin CAN win, but it requires our unwavering support/investment to do so.",
"sig": "78be9f27bc41ae1592a70619899f346252b27321114bfc80d4472b7d0e0b24ebcf7cda71f6b37f41a431dfffd0799fe90b85d8f7b970a510eeb995431d243351"
}