By Bitwave 
As I write this, Bitcoin (BTC) has reached a new all-time high, and the enthusiasm among holders is palpable. However, amidst the celebration, it’s essential to examine the underlying narrative perpetuated by some within our industry – the maximalist attitude.
The Maximalist Mindset: A Misguided Approach
The Bitcoin maximalists evangelize about the technology being superior to all others, advocating that every Web3 project should be built exclusively on Bitcoin. While their passion is admirable, this stance is fundamentally flawed and contradicts the original intention behind Bitcoin’s creation – to decentralize finance.
Setting the Record Straight: What Bitcoin Was Meant to Do
Ethereum was designed to serve as the foundation for decentralized applications (dApps) and smart contracts, not Bitcoin. The Ethereum blockchain offers a more robust platform for building complex systems, whereas Bitcoin is better suited for simple, decentralized transactions.
Examples of Inefficient and Overhyped Solutions: Take, Ordinals, and Their Impact
Some examples that illustrate the limitations of Bitcoin’s maximalist approach are:
- Take: A project where people pay over $17,000 for images supposedly drawn by a child. These intentionally sloppy and basic creations should not exist.
- Bitcoin Ordinals: A creative solution to representing information on-chain through inscribing data on single satoshis. However, this method is inefficient and clogs the Bitcoin network. Binance’s decision to shut down support for Ordinals indicates that while they may be attractive to purists or maximalists, they are merely novelties.
The Broader Implications of Maximalism: Adoption, Development, and the Web3 Narrative
The maximalist belief influences not only Bitcoin adoption but also the development of all blockchain-related technologies and the broader narrative around the Web3 industry. However, this approach neglects the fact that not everything needs to be decentralized or on-chain.
The Reality Many Web3 Builders Ignore: Not Everything Needs Blockchain
The reality is that many industries, systems, or methodologies would benefit from complementing existing technologies rather than replacing them outright with blockchain. Some things work perfectly fine with the technology we have today, and the blockchain should complement these systems rather than replace them.
The Challenges of Striking the Right Balance: Decentralization and Immutable Ledgers
It’s not as simple as pointing to an industry, system, or methodology and saying, "The blockchain would fix it." It isn’t easy to strike the right balance of decentralization or to know when it would be beneficial to record transactions immutably. If it were, our industry would likely have more use cases than it does today.
Shifting Focus: Blending Web2 and Web3
Instead of "bridging" Web2 and Web3, we should focus on blending the two worlds to take what works from each and create the best user experience possible. It’s good to evolve and try new things, but it doesn’t help when Web3 builders fight complementary Web2 technologies.
All Technologies Exist on a Spectrum: Collaboration and Coexistence
Another reality that escapes some maximalists is that all technologies exist on a spectrum and work together in one way or another. The internet still serves as the basis for everything we do, Web2 technologies will continue to be the dominant online infrastructure for the foreseeable future, and the need to transact fiat currency is unlikely to disappear.
Misconceptions About Decentralization: Address Ownership and Access
Many people don’t even know their wallet holds the cryptographic key to access their tokens rather than the tokens themselves. Blockchain technology often relies on the systems it’s designed to replace, which is more akin to shifting the work elsewhere, not actually decentralizing the processes, rules, and access underlying the system.
A Call to Action: Establishing a Durable Ecosystem
Web3 builders should focus on establishing a durable, flexible, wide-ranging ecosystem, not overly relying on one blockchain or another at the expense of the wider industry, even if that chain’s token has surpassed $100,000. By adopting a more inclusive and collaborative approach, we can create a thriving Web3 landscape that benefits everyone.
Conclusion
The maximalist attitude is a misguided approach that neglects the complexities of our industry and the needs of various stakeholders. By embracing diversity and promoting collaboration among different technologies and platforms, we can build a more robust and resilient ecosystem that truly lives up to the promise of Web3.