Published on: 2015-06-13T06:05:35+00:00
Former Bitcoin developer Mike Hearn believes that decentralization is crucial for the cryptocurrency system. He suggests using an "ASIC resistant" alt-coin with no SPV or web wallets to achieve this goal. Hearn emphasizes that the number of independent people who mine is more important than the percentage of the community that mines. However, some argue that having more usage but concentrated power in a smaller elite group would be preferable.Hearn discusses how Bitcoin has become less decentralized over time due to the rise of mining pools. While there used to be thousands of people mining with their own CPUs and GPUs, now only dozens of full nodes matter for block selection. However, a recent report suggests that the number of Bitcoin miners is actually higher than popular estimates. Mining pools may make Bitcoin appear less decentralized, but they do not necessarily undermine the cooperative nature of the ecosystem.The discussion also involves the value and goals of Bitcoin. Hearn argues that Bitcoin's value comes from its decentralization, while Satoshi Nakamoto counters that usage is what gives Bitcoin value. Hearn believes that Bitcoin's utility lies in its lack of centralized control. He states that decentralization is the primary objective of Bitcoin and that the absolute number of independent people in control is what matters for decentralization.There is controversy among core developers regarding a proposal to raise capacity in the Bitcoin ecosystem. Some see it as necessary for the system's growth, while others believe they have veto power over changes to Bitcoin. This disagreement could potentially lead to a fork in the system. The value of Bitcoin is not solely based on decentralization but also on its usage. There are proposals for layer 2 and offchain solutions, but implementing them is not a straightforward task.Gavin Andresen, a core developer of Bitcoin, prioritizes scaling up as the biggest concern. He believes that increasing the block size limit will not lead to centralization and that layer 2 services built on top of the blockchain are necessary for various types of payments. However, he acknowledges concerns about long-term security and transaction fees.Jerome Legoupil expresses concern over Gavin Andresen's approach to implementing a big increase in the block size limit. He believes that decentralization is crucial for Bitcoin's security model and opposes the 20MB proposal.Gavin Andresen plans to ask for help in reviewing and submitting patches for his proposal to increase the block size limit. He aims to avoid future debates by gradually growing the limit. However, this approach is criticized as it distracts core developers from their technical responsibilities. Some argue that the proposed increase compromises Bitcoin's long-term security. Jerome opposes the proposal, suggesting that reaching a limit would incentivize layer 2 and off-chain solutions and allow consensus to be reached if necessary.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T12:59:53.860490+00:00