Re: Interesting twist to the bitcoin blockchain debate

On 24 May 2017 at 07:43, Michael D. Palage <michael@palage.com> wrote:

> Hello Melvin,
>
>
>
> Yes the comments were colorful. However, I think the list might find this
> article by Coindesk on the topic a little more in-depth, but less
> colorful), see http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoins-new-scaling-
> agreement-reaction/
>
>
>
> Ironically this is not unlike the domain name space where Registrars
> engage in an arms race to acquire accreditations to increase the odds of
> registering deleting domain names from a registry.  When VeriSign back in
> the day proposed a new service that would remove this artificial, but very
> lucrative market, Registrars sued.
>

Thanks for sharing.

I do find this topic interesting.

There is every indication that satoshi considered this a trivial matter.
In the sense that, 'if the blocks fill up we can just increase the block
size'.

It's great that there is a thoughtful debate around it imho, and not
tinkering for the sake of 'progress', which is a common thought process.

There is a 'slippery slope' argument here which I think is valid.  I
applaud the core devs on the way they have managed this issue and guided
bitcoin to be the phenomenon it is today.

There is always an incredible urge to 'fix' something, even if it is not
broken.  And bitcoin is not remotely broken, despite the spam attacks it's
faced.  The longer it takes the better, people will get to understand how
bitcoin operates as the central bank of the internet.

Ultimately it's an issue that doesnt matter too much, imho.  So it's great
this furore is about something on the margins, and not something that
matters.  It would not even surprise me if Satoshi actually envisioned
this.

Soft forks are always better than hard forks.  Unless you want to move to a
more fiat style governance model which is profitable, but has certain
disadvantages that bitcoin was designed to ameliorate.

Although ultimately if bitcoin flounders there are 100 other forks itching
to get market share.  I personally think bitcoin has by far the best
governance of any block chain tech.


>
>
> As I always say, follow the money.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 23, 2017 5:43 PM
> *To:* Blockchain CG <public-blockchain@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Interesting twist to the bitcoin blockchain debate
>
>
>
> The comments make quite an interesting read.
>
> From what I gather (and I could be wrong here), there is pressure from a
> group of companies to go in one direction vs the proposals of the core
> developers.
>
> I personally have a lot of faith in the core development team.  It will be
> interesting to see which wins out.
>
>
> https://medium.com/@DCGco/bitcoin-scaling-agreement-at-
> consensus-2017-133521fe9a77
>