Author: Billy Tetrud 2022-05-03 00:04:45
Published on: 2022-05-03T00:04:45+00:00
In a recent email exchange, John Carvalho claims that the path to consensus in Bitcoin is to propose things everyone needs. This statement is met with disagreement as many argue that not everything in Bitcoin is necessary for all users, and some features can be beneficial even if not requested by every user. Designers are encouraged to solve problems with designs and create solutions rather than only adding features that users have directly asked for, as this can lead to bloated products that are confusing. While some people want more complex and powerful covenants, CTV focuses on simplicity and incremental change.The urgency of a problem or feature is debatable, but it is important to get ahead of potential issues and avoid hasty mistakes. Personal attacks are discouraged as they are antithetical to consensus.In a recent post on the Bitcoin development mailing list, Michael Folkson expressed his concerns over an individual's attempt to activate a contentious soft fork bypassing technical concerns from many developers and users. While some believe that this was the first time such an attempt was made, others suggest that the whole thing worked as designed. Andreas Antonopoulos, Jimmy Song, and other well-known Bitcoin educators brought attention to the dangers, and a URSF movement gained momentum, causing those attempting the activation to back off.Folkson notes that it is unacceptable for one person to bring the entire Bitcoin network to the brink of a chain split and that there should be a personal cost to dissuade them from trying it again. He also acknowledges that Bitcoin is a permissionless network and that no authority can stop things like this from happening again.In a separate post, Jeremy Rubin discusses the events of the past two weeks and the response to them. He apologizes for any role his actions may have had in leading to confusion within the community regarding Bitcoin's "technical consensus" and how changes are approved. Rubin suggests that the coming months will be messy but believes that efforts should be made to better document how Bitcoin's technical consensus process works, address concerns around negative potential of covenants, renew conversations about activation and release mechanisms, and work towards systematizing knowledge around covenant technologies.Overall, both posts highlight the importance of consensus and collaboration within the Bitcoin community to ensure the network's continued success.
Updated on: 2023-06-15T20:17:16.369088+00:00