techfeudalist on Nostr: I think this was a very productive discussion. Thank you. 🙏 My position is that ...
I think this was a very productive discussion. Thank you. 🙏
My position is that the rush to solve scaling is premature. Changes to the protocol must be both safe and necessary.
There is a debate over CTV’s safety and many devs acknowledge some risk. But what about its necessity?
Do we have an existential scaling problem today? As I type, the mempool is clearing at 3 sats/vbtye.
I’ve seen no evidence that normies want self-custodial bitcoin right now. It’s funny because @utxo just shared a meme on how normies want centralized apps where they can sign in with Google:
You want self-custodial bitcoin, I do too. But I’ve seen NO evidence that bitcoin is failing to grow because of an inability to scale or that CTV, CAT or anything else will “fix” whatever future problem we might have.
We can’t “solve” problems that don’t yet exist. Especially if we’re taking a risk to the bitcoin network in doing so.
Maybe you’ll be right and there will be an existential scaling problem someday. If there is, the best minds can solve it then. Isn’t premature optimization one of the worst “crimes” in computer science? In the meantime, we should continue to do research and test out options on other layers so we’re ready for what the future brings.
There is no ossification “now or never” line in the sand unless you believe C++ coding will somehow be lost to antiquity.
Devs arguing that they need to push this through quickly while they can is just an indictment that they believe that they have some power now that they won’t have later. Those devs believe they should have the governance power and not the nodes. This is a power grab, and an attack on the network.
My position is that the rush to solve scaling is premature. Changes to the protocol must be both safe and necessary.
There is a debate over CTV’s safety and many devs acknowledge some risk. But what about its necessity?
Do we have an existential scaling problem today? As I type, the mempool is clearing at 3 sats/vbtye.
I’ve seen no evidence that normies want self-custodial bitcoin right now. It’s funny because @utxo just shared a meme on how normies want centralized apps where they can sign in with Google:
quoting note1ejc…cj2pYou may not like it, but this is how regular people think, even those who are open to Bitcoin
You want self-custodial bitcoin, I do too. But I’ve seen NO evidence that bitcoin is failing to grow because of an inability to scale or that CTV, CAT or anything else will “fix” whatever future problem we might have.
We can’t “solve” problems that don’t yet exist. Especially if we’re taking a risk to the bitcoin network in doing so.
Maybe you’ll be right and there will be an existential scaling problem someday. If there is, the best minds can solve it then. Isn’t premature optimization one of the worst “crimes” in computer science? In the meantime, we should continue to do research and test out options on other layers so we’re ready for what the future brings.
There is no ossification “now or never” line in the sand unless you believe C++ coding will somehow be lost to antiquity.
Devs arguing that they need to push this through quickly while they can is just an indictment that they believe that they have some power now that they won’t have later. Those devs believe they should have the governance power and not the nodes. This is a power grab, and an attack on the network.