According to @BitMEXResearch, the team resurfaced material from a 2015 presentation, noting they have not seen Mike Hearn’s Bitcoin views stated this clearly for a long time and asking whether those views are coming back into fashion. Source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Oct 6, 2025. According to the source, the post provides no new technical details, price data, or trading guidance beyond posing this question about Mike Hearn’s Bitcoin perspective. Source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Oct 6, 2025.

According to @BitMEXResearch, @boomer_btc’s view mirrors Mike Hearn’s earlier position that Bitcoin miners may prioritize the network’s long-term health over maximizing immediate next-block fee revenue when selecting transactions (source: @BitMEXResearch, Oct 6, 2025). According to @BitMEXResearch, this miner transaction-selection incentive issue has been debated endlessly within the community (source: @BitMEXResearch, Oct 6, 2025).

According to BitMEX Research, the blocksize war within the Bitcoin community was about more than just the technical aspect of blocksize. In 2015, there was opposition to figures like Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn, who were associated with the Bitcoin Foundation and perceived as linked to major financial institutions. This opposition has evolved, with some now challenging the current Bitcoin Core developers, suggesting an ongoing tension between different factions within the Bitcoin ecosystem.

According to BitMEX Research, Amir Taaki likely supported the smaller blockers during the onset of The Blocksize War in 2015. BitMEX Research describes Amir as an anti-establishment radical, suggesting he may have viewed Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn as too aligned with business interests. This historical perspective could provide insights into the ideological divides that have shaped Bitcoin's development.