The article promotes a more moderate Bitcoin Maximalism, that does not abolish "Smart Contracts" or the possibility of another chain overtaking Bitcoin e.g. in market cap.<p>For the first point there are more and more 2nd layer solutions building on bitcoin, like RSK, or Lightning, supported by many Maximalists.
In the end I would prefer using those solutions which have the most seemless integration with my store of value.<p>Now my store of value of choice should be that of everybody else, or else it would not be a good store of value. This leads to the case where another chain overtakes Bitcoin.<p>This is kind of alright with me, as long as that chain is a fork of Bitcoin or an Airdrop, and it should probably be a done deal, meaning a vast majority of the ecosystem supports it, even before it goes online. In every other case, e.g. Ethereum overtaking Bitcoin, I could not accept the new leader as a store of value easily, since it could be replaced again. Especially if the replaced asset would lose worth quickly. Exception of course is a possible but improbable unfixable technjcal failure.<p>It seems I am risking the predestination trap.