Author: Martin Stolze 2017-03-27 17:18:22
Published on: 2017-03-27T17:18:22+00:00
The discussion on Bitcoin terminology has been causing confusion, with some suggesting that the use of certain terms such as "miner" is not helpful in understanding the complexities of Bitcoin. Robert Keagen's perspective on psychological development has been referenced as a way to understand the different stages of Bitcoin development. It has been suggested that Stage 2 and 3 (miner, cash, network upgrade) are discussing with Stage 4 (hash power, settlement, fork). However, the use of the term "money" is not necessarily wrong, but credit and debt could be more useful in gauging the deeper complexities of economics. The idea of forking has been suggested to have a dilutive effect on existing BTC holders, but this sentiment has been countered by others who do not anticipate any negative impact. The conversation also touches on the role of miners and transaction processors and how users can choose where to transact. It has been noted that physical location or jurisdiction of the miner does not necessarily have legal implications. However, the ability for users to select their preferred transaction processor has been proposed as a way to incentivize processors to behave in accordance with user interests. Overall, the discussion highlights the ongoing evolution of Bitcoin and the importance of clear and accurate terminology.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T22:21:06.541529+00:00