Published on: 2015-06-20T02:59:25+00:00
In an email exchange from June 2015, Mike Hearn expressed concern about Blockstream employees opposing a blocksize hard fork and suggested that they may be hiding their true motives. The ongoing debate around the implementation of a blocksize hard fork in Bitcoin was highlighted, with some arguing it would create security issues while others believed it was necessary for accommodating the growing number of transactions.The conversation shifted towards lobbying for 20MB blocks and whether payments were accepted for this purpose. The prioritization of user rights versus company interests in Bitcoin was discussed, with one participant arguing that developers lobby for changes beneficial to funding companies. They disagreed with the idea of a "social contract" and "strong user ethos" in Bitcoin.The discussion then focused on the urgency of raising the block size limit to prevent congestion and the accusation that one participant accepted payment from companies to lobby for larger blocks. It was noted that Blockstream had a potential conflict of interest due to their involvement in Sidechains and Lightning. Polling suggested that users strongly supported increasing the block size, and the Bitcoin social contract was defined by its founding vision.An email chain between Eric Lombrozo and Dr. Adam Back discussed the potential downfall of Bitcoin, with Lombrozo suggesting that someone will eventually create a better version. Lombrozo argued that being the first does not guarantee success, citing examples like Mac and Windows PC, and Yahoo! and Google. He concluded that there is untapped brainpower available for cryptocurrency development, potentially relegating Bitcoin to history.Dr. Adam Back discussed the payment protocol layer in Bitcoin, emphasizing the importance of transitioning to layer2 and working on decentralization and algorithmic scaling. User rights were deemed more important than company interests, as Bitcoin is a user-centric currency. Importing company interests could lead to the demise of Bitcoin.In another discussion, Dr. Adam Back suggested using sidechains to test beta features and novel ideas on the Bitcoin network. Eric Lombrozo highlighted the issue of forking cryptoledgers and argued against unilaterally imposing changes to consensus rules, as it would undermine the value of decentralized cryptoledgers.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T13:22:51.729946+00:00