Bitcoin cannot be taken over. That's the point of Bitcoin. Saying NYA is a takeover implies Core currently controls Bitcoin. Do they?
Which means keeping existing consensus rules if devs' interests start to deviate from users's. That is a good thing.
-
-
Transparent OSS process mitigates the problem of development centralization. It's hard to hide intent in code.
-
So dev centralization worst case is protocol stagnation: network intact. Miner centralization worst case, otoh, reduces network security.
-
You call protocol stagnation and killing off Bitcoin as a payment system before secure alternatives are ready as network being intact? ....
-
Protocol stagnation won't kill Bitcoin. Stability promotes a healthy ecosystem. No clear consensus in changes == keeping current consensus.
-
Theres no such thing as "protocol stagnation". Stable protocols built the web we know today. Whoever says "protocol stagnation" is very dumb
-
On the contrary, one can argue many problems with the Internet are due to the protocol being fixed and lacking in many aspects.
-
One example is the insane complexity & convolution of the web development stack.
-
Another example is TCP/IP didn't consider trust at the protocol layer. Resulted in a less secure, more vulnerable Internet.
- 1 more reply
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.
