Vitalik Buterin’s Best Work Yet: “In Defense Of Bitcoin Maximalism”

Did Buterin concern his senses? Did Ethereum designer Péter Szilágyi’s thread encourage him that something was rotten at the core of his procedure? Or is this some type of ill joke? The title of the most recent post on Vitalik Buterin’s blog site is “In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism.” Is this an April Fools trick? Or is the Ethereum developer attempting to inform us something?

Let’s admit it, the post is probably an alien’s variation of an April Fools joke. However, it includes some quite effective concepts. Even if Buterin was being paradoxical, he was right on target for the a lot of part. First, the author establishes the scene by explaining the existing circumstance as it appears to outsiders: 

“Bitcoin is a boomer coin, and Ethereum is soon to follow; it will be newer and more energetic assets that attract the new waves of mass users who don’t care about weird libertarian ideology or “self-sovereign verification”, are switched off by toxicity and anti-government mindset, and simply desire blockchain defi and video games that are quick and work.”

Is the author Vitalik Buterin, though? Probably not. Let’s check out why.

Is Buterin A Hidden Bitcoin Maximalist?

A curious truth associated to this story: Vitalik Buterin created the term “Bitcoin maximalist.” At initially, it was an insult. In any case, the post continues by discussing the bitcoin-for-dissidents utilize case: 

“Blockchains are being utilized every day by unbanked and underbanked individuals, by activists, by sex employees, by refugees, and by lots of other groups either who are dull for profit-seeking central banks to serve, or who have opponents that don’t desire them to be served. They are utilized as a main lifeline by many individuals to make their payments and save their cost savings.

And to that end, public blockchains compromise a lot for security.”

To safeguard such an undertaking, the procedure “requires two key ingredients: (i) a robust and defensible technology stack and (ii) a robust and defensible culture.” So far, so great. Then, however, the author begins trashing Vitalik for his way of life of the abundant and well-known. Using numerous pictures of Buterin with world leaders from all over, the author establishes this toxic description:

“Vitalik is a hippy-happy globetrotting pleasure and status-seeker, and he deeply enjoys meeting and feeling respected by people who are important. And it’s not just Vitalik; companies like Consensys are totally happy to partner with Saudi Arabia, and the ecosystem as a whole keeps trying to look to mainstream figures for validation.”

So, no. Buterin is most likely not the author of this impressive piece.

ETH rate chart for 04/01/2022 on Coinbase | Source: ETH/USD on

Divide And Conquer

Sadly, the author continues by drawing clear lines in the sand: 

“We can see the two sides pretty clearly: team “blockchain”, fortunate individuals in rich nations who enjoy to virtue-signal about “moving beyond money and capitalism” and can’t assist being thrilled about “decentralized governance experimentation” as a pastime, and group “Bitcoin”, an extremely varied group of both abundant and bad individuals in lots of nations worldwide consisting of the Global South, who are in fact utilizing the capitalist tool of complimentary self-sovereign cash to offer genuine worth to people today.”

Was that essential? Probably not. And the images that the post utilizes to show its point are simply ill-mannered. To make it even worse, Buterin’s ghostwriter raises the bet by discussing why bitcoin doesn’t have or desire clever agreements in its Layer 1. This is important alpha:

“A common misconception about why Bitcoin does not support “richly stateful” clever agreements goes as follows. Bitcoin actually actually values being easy, and especially having low technical intricacy, to minimize the possibility that something will fail. As an outcome, it doesn’t wish to include the more complex functions and opcodes that are essential to be able to support more complex clever agreements in Ethereum.”

The author considers it a “misconception” due to the fact that bitcoin does support complicated clever agreements, simply not in the very first layer.  It’s a well-thought-out method, not a bug. Near the post’s conclusion, Vitalik Buterin’s April Fools joke plainly heads out of line:

“Maximalism is not just Bitcoin-for-the-sake-of-Bitcoin; rather, it’s a very genuine realization that most other cryptoassets are scams, and a culture of intolerance is unavoidable and necessary to protect newbies and make sure at least one corner of that space continues to be a corner worth living in.”

Wow, Vitalik. Even if this was a joke, it went too far. Was it essential to knock “most other cryptoassets” as “scams”? This is a market that you assisted produce.

Anyway, April Fools!

Featured Image from Nairametrics | Charts by TradingView

Michael Evans

Professional writer, editor, and producer with over a decade of experience. I'm an experienced editor who has written for a variety of publications, and I specialize in editing non-fiction articles, news, and business blogs.

Related Articles

Back to top button