Author: Pindar Wong 2015-06-16 12:33:31
Published on: 2015-06-16T12:33:31+00:00
In 2015, the Bitcoin development community was engaged in a contentious debate over how to address the issue of scalability. The discussion centered on the potential risks involved in promoting a unilateral hard fork, which some believed would give too much control to one person and weaken the change governance model.Adam Back and Mike Hearn exchanged emails discussing these issues, with Back arguing that the existing collaborative review process should be maintained. He also expressed concern about security risks associated with protocol upgrades and urged caution in any decisions made.Hearn, on the other hand, emphasized the importance of scaling Bitcoin to avoid breaking it and driving users away. The two also discussed openness and transparency in technical discussions, with Back raising concerns about the lack of transparency in Hearn's lobbying efforts and urging him to disclose the companies he had spoken with.The development community ultimately rejected the idea of a hard fork and instead proposed a combination plan focused on improving decentralization, slowly increasing block size, and algorithmic scaling. They stressed the importance of considering all options and discussing potential risks with companies involved in Bitcoin.Furthermore, the community is actively working towards finding solutions that maintain the integrity of Bitcoin's security and functionality. They believe that hasty decisions can lead to moral hazard and put too much at stake. The complexity of the Bitcoin system requires collaborative efforts towards finding solutions.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T23:15:15.195656+00:00