Ari Paul, Founder of BlockTower Capital Expressed:  Bitcoin was initially dismissed by many as too new, too risky, too challenging to elites or governments, too buggy, too centralized – to be taken seriously. Those no-coiner arguments then got recycled by Bitcoiners against ethereum, now recycled by Ethereans against Solana.

Some of this is just natural partisan rationalization – we adopt “useful” arguments against competitors even if we railed against those exact same arguments as illogical when used against us. We see the same, with say, GOP and Dem stances on filibuster changing conveniently.

Same happens with the metrics people demand we use to value these assets. 4 years ago, a lot of maxis said on-chain security spend was the key metric. No-coiners dismissed on-chain metrics as “bad” spending on silly things like Dark Net markets or speculation.

Now, bitcoin maxis dismiss the metrics they liked 4 years ago with the same reasoning – oh, security spend doesn’t matter if it’s coming from “bad” spending on silly things like buying jpegs.  And Ethereans dismiss metrics like TVL and usage when “abused” by, say, BSC. All of this mostly comes down to one thing – people rationalizing their (unrelated) love of, and/or extreme financial exposure to an asset and protocol.

Whenever I find myself hunting for weak arguments to support my position, I take that as a warning sign that I’m in “rationalization” mode, not “truth seeking” mode. Broadly, when you see “elites” coping with rationalization, it’s a signal that they’re scared for good reason

The only explicit state attacks on a network or team have been over securities offerings. Saying a call to Amazon would shut down ethereum is no different from saying a call to Get-up would shut down bitcoin.

People complained about Satoshi as dictator pushing unilateral hard forks without even notifying people in Bitcoin’s first two years. Lots of that chatter on bitcoin talk, that Satoshi engaged with.

Community Response:  Ethereans have done this previously with EOS Were they rationalizing or just correct? Where is the line?

Two things I learned about tech in the 90s that I am applying today. 1. Very often the best tech doesn’t win 2. Religion in tech is dangerous. See number 1.

Bitcoin is not just tech. It’s first decentralized digital money. It’s more similar to rare art than a tech company. It won the day it was created.

There is no “line of acceptable centralization” when it comes to defense against governments. Its why long term I am most bullish on BTC – as evidenced by block size wars, it doesn’t give into the temptation of sacrificing decentralization for other variables (efficiency, etc.)