Author: Jorge Timón 2015-06-28 15:35:17
Published on: 2015-06-28T15:35:17+00:00
The conversation between Milly Bitcoin and a developer discusses the centralized nature of Bitcoin code development. Milly Bitcoin points out that Bitcoin.org maintainers change rules on the fly and sometimes say a proposal has no objections so it is approved while other times they say it has no support so it is rejected. The developers argue that forking the project is just one click away, but controversial changes to the consensus rules cannot be deployed safely. The discussion then moves on to the issue of who has control over consensus rules with developers arguing that influence is relative and not only core developers have it. They also state that the process of seeking consensus is vague and any other formal process would imply centralization in decision making, thereby destroying Bitcoin. The conversation ends with the assertion that some kind of process needs to be developed that does not involve trying to convince one person to make changes or a system that depends on unwritten, ever-changing rules maintained by a handful of people.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T00:54:43.561920+00:00