Centralized influence for decentralized projects is good. @VitalikButerin's influence on dev direction is a strength. Leaderless OSS w/ many parties collaborating on improvements becomes design-by-committee. Committees add uncontroversial features, they don't reenvision
-
-
I was considering this the other day, a single person can envision, define, oversee the first impls, but at some point working groups have to form in order to stabilize and incorporate feedback mechanisms.
-
But then how to jump ahead of the stabilization. How to get free of the initial decisions and tech debt. Sometimes there has to be breaking changes to progress.
-
And that is where the BDFL can come into conflict with the early community and its need for stabilization. But how else do we get the Macintosh after the Apple ][? How else do we get Ethereum 2?
-
Another parallel, 40+ years later we haven't really seen an Internet 2. And, I mean the backbone of the internet, not web2/3. There is room for protocol and network improvement. Yet, they haven't really materialized. We have a lot to learn from what they did/didn't do.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.