<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>jb55 wrote</title><author_name>jb55 (npub1xt…vkk5s)</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.now/npub1xtscya34g58tk0z605fvr788k263gsu6cy9x0mhnm87echrgufzsevkk5s</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.now</provider_url><html>one nuance to this: when one says &#34;meritocracy&#34; in reality what you&#39;re really doing is subscribing to a core-dev &#34;web of trust&#34; (since nostr:npub1u5njm6g5h5cpw4wy8xugu62e5s7f6fnysv0sj0z3a8rengt2zqhsxrldq3 nostr:npub1manlnflyzyjhgh970t8mmngrdytcp3jrmaa66u846ggg7t20cgqqvyn9tn nerd sniped me on decentralized web of trust stuff recently)&#xA;&#xA;if this web of trust (who vouches for who and what they agree on) could be visualized, it might be easier to see what flavor of bitcoin you&#39;re getting into (knots, etc) which would have a different web of trust wrt. engineering decisions&#xA;&#xA;how bitcoin evolves is determined by which economic nodes subscribe to which WoT... i think this is the most accurate definition of what bitcoin is and what its future trajectory is?&#xA;&#xA;I currently trust the existing core devs who have made what bitcoin is up to this point, since they have the most experience. luke&#39;s WoT is a lot smaller and therefore it&#39;s not really safe to join IMO.&#xA;nostr:note18jzxglk6y5vpvhvkw4n7trz2n97s5q5j9yv2rucwyef24z22ulasmfj0tc</html></oembed>