Actually on zero-sat, he did NOT change the protocol, even tho it made more sense to change it. He stuck with zero-sat allowance, but just called it stupid if people over-rely on it. Personally I think zero-sat is a mistake, but it's now upto miners to decide whether to accept them. I think they are disastrous and anyone who uses them is taking a shit in their own commons.

You'd need to be more specific on which government is doing what. I know there's things like diplomatic immunity, but I believe even that only goes so far. If American Senators can insider-trade but the rest of the world cannot, then that's certainly a problem. But the Constitution may not have handled that one 🤷🏻‍♂️.

I'm with you on the logic, but I don't think the Bitcoin Association is what many people think it is. It's main job is to protect the protocol from frivolous change, and promote bitcoin usage. Every commodity has something similar, and ...