Yes of course anyone that doesn't is dumb or a controlled op 

 Some people just want the base layer to work, which it does. 

 The fact that it works today doesn't mean it not necessary to maintain, code that works still needs to be maintained, upgraded,  increase security and patch stuff. All this needs funding.  

 Good thing bitcoin is a positive feedback loop 

 The more stuff is added the more maintaining and patching is needed. When Dorsey says “more secure” “more private” the implication is that new code will be added to make it that way.

A lot of people don’t want that. 

 More secure can just mean updated and maintained code. Any different changes has to be approved by the community.  

 More code screw up will necessitate more patches in the future 

 I'm not talking about more code, more code is new stuff. I'm talking maintenance and mostly focused on security.  

 In the context Jack was puting maintenance was to push privacy stuff in the base layer which would #Bitcoin transparency and auditability. I agree with have #Bitcoin devs maintening the code and only update if necessary btw not all updates are good some updatres can be a downgrade to #Bitcoin. 
 

 *Which would kill Bitcoin privacy, I mean 

 I think his concern as is mine: Is this tinkering around necessary? Bitcoin needs testing and maintenance but not a new proposal every other month 

 "remove the base layer" 

 You want to have both. But there is a real dilemma that you can not have both at the same time.


Bitcoin and Monero are complimentary. Use it in your favour, anon! 

 "Perfect" auditability and "perfect" privacy are mutually incompatible. You have to make a decision on what you want and forgo the other. Or have something in between with the worse sides of both.
L2s don't solve this either as it has to make the same decision. Take ecash for example. Aside from the custodial elephant in the room - very strong privacy, although there are half-baked incomplete methods of auditing, it is not really possible.

Can't have your cake and eat it too 

 decentralization and security are the most important. anything that adds to that I support.  

 Core devs need funding, the code has to be maintained even without new feats. New proposals have to be approved as always.  

 Not sure how it could be more secure, unless there is a bug

It will have to have at least a second layer to scale - I hope some of those solutions can increase the privacy  

 For the code illiterate like myself,  Can you explain why maintenance is necessary?

I think the thought process goes.
no changes = no risk of my BTC getting Nuked  

 Who’s working on making bitcoin more private? 

 Isn't #bitcoin base layer extremely secure at this point and as private as open ledger could ? funding devs is one thing..funding and grants given out by huge centralized, wall street entities- well that is a HUGE PROBLEM right there. There must be way of grants that don't end up being ETF owners' doing the funding. That could only lead to corruption. Thanks God we all can run nodes and decide which Bitcoin we want to run..Consensus saved BTC a few times and I believe it wiil. 

 Isn't it perfect as it is? 

 yes ! 

 We don't want people to keep stuffing in a bunch of useless things on the base layer either. More privacy can be reach on second layers. The #Bitcoin transparency is necessary for it's succes, thus "Proof of reserve", etc. And Base layer privacy introduce inflation bugs that requires even more devs fucking are around with it. There are work that need to be done like fixing the timestamp problem but we don't need billions to be donated to devs to stear #Bitcoin core in defferent directions either.