In this astute founder of the institute has an aversion to the developing direction of the Core 006 yqfwzgy1frtfdh0qqrj30rr0fmu03. JPG (169.91 KB, downloaded: 0) download attachment to the photo album Set to cover Upload a half an hour ago
This month, Daniel Krawisz, co-founder of the Satoshi Nakamoto Institute, left the Institute after finding the SNI community becoming unbearable, even distastefull. Many of Daniel’s posts on SNI have been deleted, articles about the Bitcoin fork have been banned, and the actions of the SNI community have made Daniel feel like he is no longer a part of the organization.
Daniel, an early supporter of Bitcoin, co-founded the Nakamoto Satoshi Institute in 2013, hoping to bring together a group of like-minded people to research and promote bitcoin. As a senior software engineer himself, Daniel has a deeper understanding of Bitcoin. Since its inception, Daniel has published a large number of articles in the SNI community. Daniel is also the first person to introduce Austrian economic views into Bitcoin. Bitcoin would be more useful “, and has devoted a number of articles to arguing the point.
The biggest reason for the large number of deleted articles by Daniel is that Daniel is neutral and never takes sides in the expansion debate. Daniel believes that the long debate is meaningless. The previous conflict between Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Cash was not just about the block cap size. It also includes both sides’ ideas about what bitcoin should be.
Daniel’s views clashed with the other co-founders and community managers, the article was deleted, and Daniel became unpopular in the SNI community, but mainly in the Bitcoin Core and Blockstream communities, They reject any article or discussion that doesn’t fit their views, especially about expansion. He was not invited to the first annual party of the Satoshi Institute.
In my opinion, this is obviously a manifestation of a guilty conscience. If Core is right, why should it strictly control the community speech?
Daniel is still active in the community, but no longer plans to post in SNI.
Daniel, who left SNI, tweeted this week: “Bitcoin used to be a creative place, but BTC has become a cult. Cult members cannot guarantee their own interests and have to obey their leaders, thus becoming hostile to people with different views, but obedient investments can’t always be good.”
How long and what does it take to go from being a respected early bitcoin supporter like Daniel to not being embraced by the Core and BS communities? The simple answer is that it is enough not to explicitly support BTC. Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn were both pushed out of Core for having different ideas.
These excluded people all have some characteristics in common. For example, they are all early supporters of Bitcoin, they all contributed to the development of Bitcoin because they are at odds with Core and their ideas are in line with BCH’s philosophy.
Daniel believes that bitcoin should be treated as a currency, not simply as a store of value. It is not a correct idea to buy bitcoin and wait for its value to rise. The value of bitcoin is because more people use it. Daniel also sees Bitcoin Cash (BCH) as a must-know for anyone who wants to understand bitcoin.