Bitcoin Roadmap 2015, or "If We Do Nothing" Analysis [combined summary]



Individual post summaries: Click here to read the original discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list

Published on: 2015-07-25T11:19:43+00:00


Summary:

The author of the given context raises concerns about companies like blockchain.info and Coinbase not running full nodes to ensure proper consensus checking and security. The author argues that these companies blindly follow invalid chains and rely on their security instead of cross-checking with a full node. The author also questions if people can trust such companies in the future if the load goes higher. The lack of understanding of Bitcoin and security engineering is seen as a significant contributor to these issues.The bitcoin-dev mailing list discusses the importance of running full nodes for security purposes. Adam Back suggests that education is needed to make businesses aware of the significance of running their own full node. Peter Todd mentions that blockchain.info and Coinbase have not been running full nodes, causing issues with invalid confirmations. The need for decentralization and more layer 2 work is also highlighted to improve the system's dynamic. It is noted that major centralization-related failures will help improve understanding of the importance of full nodes.The CryptoCurrency Security Standard (CCSS) is mentioned as an open standard designed to share industry best practices. Eric invites everyone to participate in the CCSS, and the website and GitHub repository are available for contributions. The lack of running a full node by blockchain.info's wallet and block explorer is discussed, which has shown invalid data consistent with not running a full node.A discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list reveals that some companies with significant funding do not run a single Bitcoin Core node. It is suggested that this may be due to Core not providing the services that businesses want. It is emphasized that the decrease in node count is not necessarily related to block sizes.Adam Back expresses optimism about Bitcoin scaling and decentralization, highlighting the active work being done in these areas. He suggests a modest block size increase to facilitate the transition to layer 2. The question of whether a 1MB increase to 2MB would be considered "modest" is raised.Mike Hearn notes that large companies with funding do not run a single Bitcoin Core node, citing the lack of services provided by Core. He suggests the possibility of earning a fee by propagating a valid transaction.The article emphasizes the need for education about full nodes and their importance for security. Companies are encouraged to run their own full nodes and cross-check them to reduce risk. The need for a basic minimum bar standard and reducing custody through multisig and timelock is also mentioned. The author expresses optimism about Bitcoin scaling and decentralization, mentioning the importance of decentralization, economically dependent full nodes, and lower miner policy centralization for better scaling. Flexcap is highlighted as an interesting way to achieve economically validated scaling.In a discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, it is noted that even large companies with significant funding do not run a single Bitcoin Core node open to incoming connections. Security concerns are suggested as a reason for this reluctance.Despite having a substantial amount of funding, many big companies do not run a single Bitcoin Core node. This is attributed to Core not providing the services that businesses require. The decrease in node count is seen as unrelated to block sizes.Dave Scotese raises concerns about the protocol requiring more computing power than common machines can provide, rendering them unable to run full nodes. Despite the incentive to protect wallets, major firms with funding do not appear to be running their own Bitcoin Core node.The author suggests the need for a post discussing roadmap in the bitcoin-dev mailing list. Increasing transactions per second and addressing the trend toward centralization are discussed. The issue of mining falling to a small number of businesses and common computing machines becoming inadequate for running full nodes is raised.


Updated on: 2023-08-01T14:36:31.954832+00:00