CZ vs. Bitcoin Block Space: A Plot Twist

CZ vs. Bitcoin Block Space: A Plot Twist

When CZ recently wrote on X, stating "You need bitcoin more than bitcoin needs you," he noted that it was an unpopular opinion.

I'm not sure why he considers this idea unpopular. In Bitcoin circles, similar sentiments are quite common. One key argument is that blockchain space is already insufficient for new user transactions.

Over the past 21 months, had I asked a Bitcoin enthusiast whether I should buy Bitcoin, I might well have heard: "Don't buy. All blocks appear full. There's no room for your transaction." And if I countered that I could increase the transaction fee to secure space, they'd likely respond: "Then there won't be space for my transaction. Or someone else's."

Indeed, not everyone understands that block space is strictly limited. For 21 months, all blocks were consistently full. More transactions than those processed during this period simply couldn't have been conducted through Bitcoin's blockchain. This is a strict technical constraint that cannot be circumvented.

Therefore, CZ's statement seems to be justified: new Bitcoin users aren't necessary. Bitcoin manages its existing user base but has no room for growth. More transactions than currently exist are fundamentally impossible. If you need bitcoins, it makes sense to obtain them through Liquid or Rootstock sidechains to avoid overloading the main chain.

But here's the irony: CZ posted this a day after Bitcoin's blockchain first in 21 months had several blocks where there weren't enough transactions to fill them. Block space went unused.

Perhaps right now, CZ isn't entirely correct, and new Bitcoin users are actually needed.

Meanwhile, bitcoin remains available for exchange on rabbit.io, both on the main chain and on sidechains.