I think the general perspective of Bitcoin specifically around here meshes with the general stance on a lot of topics. Bitcoin is the 1.0 cryptocurrency. It was groundbreaking, but it has technological deficiencies that are/were being addressed by improvements in the general technology of cryptocurrencies. But the Bitcoin protocol itself has demonstrated to be impossible to modernize, as even the most trivial change like a block size increase is not taken up, so progress in this space is happening in the form of other cryptocurrencies. But there are a lot of people, including in the comments of HN, who have a big stake not in the technology or in cryptocurrencies in general but in Bitcoin specifically. They’re perfectly happy to see this area of technology stagnate and be held back by being forced to layer innovation over Bitcoin itself, as with the Lightning network, when much better solutions are available by moving on from Bitcoin.

So when I see someone advocating for Bitcoin specifically they come off as transparently self-serving and having no real interest in the technology. I see a lot of parallels to projects refusing to migrate off of Python 2, except in this case Bitcoin enthusiasts are compelled to actively evangelize the inferior technology instead of just sticking to it as the rest of the technology space moves along.

Why does Bitcoin need to modernize? There are other crypto projects that can fill in the holes that Bitcoin leaves (tx fees, slow, etc). Bitcoin is a fully secure, fully self-sufficient, global monetary system. It doesn't need to be lightning fast or super cheap. It needs to WORK, and work very well, which it has demonstrated.

Put the other way, why should Bitcoin not modernize?

It's already the leader by a long shot on network effects, stakeholders would be insane to squander that by letting other projects beat it technologically.

Obviously it can't move as fast as a smaller project (just like a large co vs a startup) but it will absolutely die if it doesn't move at all.

I view Bitcoin a lot like a company. Right now network security is paid for by inflation (issuing new coins), similar to a startup operating with VC money.

At the very least bitcoin must increase transaction volume so it can increase fee revenue without ridiculous individual transaction fees.

> Why does Bitcoin need to modernize?

Because ASIC vulnerability has led to the concentration of the majority of the world's mining power among a small number of organizations in China, and because the amount of power consumed securing the blockchain with PoW is silly and ever-increasing.

> There are other crypto projects that can fill in the holes that Bitcoin leaves (tx fees, slow, etc).

It's not just about filling holes, other cryptocurrency projects are superior technologically in every way. And since Bitcoin has been demonstrated to be impossible to modernize this gap will only become more extreme over time.

Bitcoin remains the locus of the cryptocurrency movement through network effects alone, which is why evangelists are so adamantly in favor of Bitcoin specifically. If it loses its throne as the "main" cryptocurrency it will never increase in price to the value that Bitcoin speculators are hoping because other than its network size it has no advantages.

> It needs to WORK, and work very well, which it has demonstrated.

I think it has categorically demonstrated that it does not work, at least not for the purpose that the original Bitcoin paper laid out. The fact that Bitcoin transactions are slow and expensive has so compellingly demonstrated that Bitcoin cannot be a useful cryptocurrency that even Bitcoin advocates admit this and have fallen back to claiming that it will instead be a store of value and that an effective currency layer could be built on top of it.