Those who prevent Bitcoin from expanding simply fail to recognize the greatness of Bitcoin.

Chapter 0 Introduction

The Bitcoin blockchain has been operating at full capacity for a long time, and the community has been calling for an upgrade to the Bitcoin protocol for more than a year. However, some people, represented by several developers in the Bitcoin Core wallet development team, have been refusing to upgrade. All their concerns about refusing have been explained clearly by others, but they still refuse. Everyone's patience is almost worn out.

Recently, the controversy over capacity expansion has once again been brought to the forefront, and both sides have begun to express their views directly. I finally discovered that the reason they refused was simply that they thought Bitcoin was not great enough.

Chapter 1: Fear of node centralization is because they think Bitcoin is not worthy of nobility

Mediocre people cannot think outside of themselves.

Those who say that capacity expansion will increase the cost of running a full Bitcoin node, thus leading to terrible centralization, do not understand that Bitcoin is great enough to attract more people to run full nodes regardless of the cost. They only calculate that their own income is not enough to ignore the cost of running a full Bitcoin node, and therefore think that others are the same as them.

I have to change my mobile phone every two years. When I get home, my mother gets angry when she sees me changing my mobile phone again. She says I shouldn’t spend the money because she doesn’t understand that the technological progress of mobile phones is worth the money.

If I told my mom that I was going to spend 500 yuan to buy a Raspberry Pi, which would consume electricity every day and generate no income, to run a Bitcoin full node, my mom would definitely say, "You're a spendthrift!"

Those who are afraid that expansion will lead to the centralization of complete nodes understand Bitcoin in the same way as my mother understands mobile phones. They do not understand the greatness of Bitcoin, so they naturally think that Bitcoin is not worth many people spending money to maintain it, and they will not care about the lack of income.

The same is true for Lamborghini. Lamborghini is expensive enough. Its price far exceeds the cost of its practical performance. It can be said that the money spent on Lamborghini is not for "usefulness" at all, but because of its "greatness" at a certain level. This is similar to running a Bitcoin full node. But Lamborghini's buyers are all over the world. Lamborghini will not lose its distribution around the world because of its high price. This is decentralization. QQ Car, on the other hand, is not far behind Lamborghini in terms of function, but no one will think QQ is "great", so QQ is destined to be "centrally" distributed in China, and it will also be looked down upon.

When Satoshi Nakamoto was mining alone, the cost of running a full node was the lowest, but Bitcoin was the most centralized, because Bitcoin was not great at that time, it was just something that could be ignored. When the greatness of Bitcoin attracts more people to join, the absolute number of running full nodes will increase, not decrease. The greater it is, the more decentralized it will be.

Chapter 2 says that blockchain resources are precious and small blocks are needed to maintain high transaction fees because they are afraid that Bitcoin will become more powerful.

The zero-sum mentality of the poor always refuses to cooperate, and they are only willing to be stingy with the existing stock.

Those who hope to filter out some Bitcoin users through transaction fees are just worried that if you use it, I will not be able to use it, so it is best to find a way to make it so that only I can use it and you cannot use it. This is the zero-sum mentality of refusing cooperation.

Bitcoin is great enough to meet unlimited demand. As long as there are 7 billion people in the world who are willing to use Bitcoin, Bitcoin has the ability to provide services.

The existing network bandwidth, existing CPU power, and existing storage costs far exceed what Bitcoin currently needs. If more is needed, the existing market will provide more and better network infrastructure services.

Google can provide search services to billions of people, WeChat can provide hundreds of millions of people online at the same time, and Alipay can handle hundreds of thousands of transactions per second at its peak. Bitcoin and these companies are using the same network foundation and the same technology. Why should Bitcoin be limited to only 7 transactions per second? Why should the block be limited to 1M?

Don’t limit yourself. We can use the most advanced technology to make the best products and arm ourselves with the most advanced ideas. Only then can Bitcoin establish new rules and become greater.

Only people with poor thinking would be afraid of losing, set limits for themselves, and use strange reasons to prevent others from cooperating with them, for fear that someone will steal their things.

Collaborative thinking is open, making full use of all conditions to create incremental wealth, rather than confining everyone within a wall to compete for existing wealth.

Bitcoin will not become cheaper just because more people use it, but it will only become more valuable. This is incremental thinking.

Chapter 3: Fear of government interference is just the cowardly thinking of a group of dark-minded people

Cowards always hide in dark corners.

As we all know, there are many hackers in the Bitcoin field, and people who have business dealings with drug dealers and money launderers. These people are afraid that the government will come to deal with them, so they strongly oppose the expansion. They hope to limit the use of Bitcoin to the TOR anonymous network, because the basic service capacity of the TOR network is far lower than that of the non-dark web, so they want to ensure that the block size is as small as possible.

They always like to say that they are "liberals" and define Bitcoin as a free currency to fight against government violence. In fact, they are a group of cowards who are parasitic on conspiracy theories.

Bitcoin is a technological advancement, a social advancement, and a world advancement that can give people a greater opportunity to create greater wealth. These cowards don’t think so. They think Bitcoin should live in disgrace and be restricted to a small group of anti-government activists, who can use it as a toy for their climax fantasies in dark corners.

In fact, governments are following this technological advancement, and the vast majority of governments in the world have a very friendly attitude towards Bitcoin, rather than fighting against Bitcoin as these shady elements think.

From another perspective, even if Bitcoin is expanded, even if the government intends to eliminate Bitcoin, the government cannot do it. This is determined by the decentralized nature of Bitcoin. The government does not have the ability to eliminate a decentralized blockchain product. Now more than 70% of the computing power is in China, but the government has not eliminated Bitcoin. You dark cowards actually have the nerve to say that you are afraid of the government to deal with the expansion.

If Bitcoin is confined to Tor, how is it different from centralization? What is the point of it? How many people in this world are willing to live under the Tor network?

Chapter 4: Those who fear that a hard fork will cause Bitcoin to split have no confidence in Bitcoin

Weak people are always afraid of losing friends.

Those who resist upgrading the Bitcoin blockchain have another reason to claim that a hard fork will cause Bitcoin to split. They want to preserve the Bitcoin community, which is bound to different people in one world, and they are afraid that making controversial upgrades to Bitcoin will cause Bitcoin to split into two coins.

The root of Bitcoin's growth is the interests involved. It is open source, and anyone can continue to hard fork it. But the reason why it is so tenacious and still maintains its leading position among countless competitors is:

For those who participate, the benefits of participating in Bitcoin legally and following the rules outweigh the benefits that can be gained by breaking the rules.

It is precisely because more and more people join in abiding by the rules of Bitcoin in order to gain benefits that Bitcoin becomes more and more successful. These people include miners, users, and core developers. They all join this great social practice because they can make profits by abiding by the rules of Bitcoin. This also makes Bitcoin itself more and more great.

Any potential hard fork, the potential split of Bitcoin into two rule sets, will inevitably lead to potential divergence of interests. Because of the nature of pursuing interests, the vast majority of people involved in Bitcoin have to follow the branch of the main rule set for the sake of interests. The other branch will either be eliminated instantly or become a dispensable existence, which is not enough to replace the Bitcoin rule set that poses the greatest threat.

Those who do not recognize the greatness of Bitcoin will hold a copycat version of a branch coin, hoping to exchange it for more benefits in the future. But the prerequisite is that he must hold this copycat version of the branch coin at no cost. For a coin holder, this can be done at no cost, except for a very small time cost. But for any service provider in the Bitcoin economic ecosystem, including exchanges, mining pools, miners, merchants... they need to spend real money to hold a copycat version of Bitcoin. This money has opportunity costs. This money invested in the real Bitcoin version can create greater benefits, far more than investing in this version that breaks the Bitcoin rules. Without these links in the economic ecosystem, holding a copycat branch coin has no meaning, it is eliminated.

It is precisely these people who do not believe in the great principle of Bitcoin that those who follow the rules will benefit, and who fantasize that Bitcoin will produce two versions of Bitcoin due to a hard fork.

Those who truly realize that Bitcoin is great, they truly understand that only by creating a larger community of interests and bringing more people into the Bitcoin interest circle can they gain more of their own benefits.

Just like strong people can easily make friends wherever they go, they never worry about losing friends due to their attitude, words and deeds. Because they know that true friends are equal in the exchange of interests. As long as they are committed to upgrading their abilities and making themselves stronger and stronger, they will have more and more friends.

People who are weak have fewer friends, so they are even more afraid of losing friends. These people are afraid that their friends will be angry, so they compromise themselves to accommodate others, and ultimately end up in a weaker position.

This is how people behave, and the same is true for Bitcoin. Only when Bitcoin is more powerful can it attract more people to join you, rather than joining the hard fork version of Bitcoin, such as Litecoin, such as Ethereum.

As for those weak people who cannot see the greatness of Bitcoin, what does it matter if they are scared to death by a hard fork?

Chapter 5 Conclusion

Why do you refuse to allow Bitcoin to scale via a hard fork? The simplest, most essential and direct answer is:

You don’t see the greatness of Bitcoin, you have absolutely no confidence in Bitcoin, and you don’t have big enough ambitions for Bitcoin.