A new record of bitcoin: why expansion dispute will not disappear
This week, a bitcoin start-up company proposed a new method to solve the bitcoin expansion dispute, this one also provoked a very familiar response.
Twitter about this dialogue upgrade, soon formed a different argument camp, deceptive information in the mass media spread quickly become rumors, finally put forward the proposal may only prove the technical differences between the supporters of a new standard.
Bitcoin bitcoin startups Purse proposed upgrade to support the so-called “extended block” but is an old story again, this is only for the start of the 2015 expansion dispute lasted a few years long proposed another proposal.
As advertised, extended blocks from the network have different needs of bitcoin users provides a way of life by their own rules, which is basically the node is able to choose their own block size, while keeping in the same network.
As a result of this scheme requires only a soft branch, that is not necessary to all nodes in the network are updated, the team said that this is a way to solve the current how to maximize the ability of digital currency trading bitcoin deadlock.
In view of this, some developers pointed out a few months (or even years) before the online discussion on similar proposals, then reveals the potential security vulnerabilities plan. Other people think that this solution may be a year of time to test and deploy, but another solution isolation witness has gone through this process.
In other words, not everyone agrees the safety performance of the new scheme.
For this industry, this seems to be expected last week, there have been two similar events.
This time, although the proposal seems to draw a lot of competing ideas, but the network may start to take a hard point in the discussion still bifurcation, and this upgrade is highly controversial, and has bitcoin risk split into two separate networks.
Mine pool F2Pool (ponds) Co owner and executive director WangChun submitted an unusual idea to bitcoin mailing list, because this idea will not trigger before 2020. His idea is to lock the 32MB block chain expansion capacity, and the bitcoin community can use soft bifurcation in the activation date will change it to a smaller size.
However, Purse Chun’s ideas and thoughts like, nor is it a new view. He said that the expansion meeting held in Hongkong last year, he had proposed this idea, and the contribution of BitcoinCore LukeDashjr has also published a similar concept.
His proposal finally proposed a warning, has been tracking the development of dispute previously may have heard, that is:
“We must start encoding some of the procedures, otherwise it will be too late.”
In a word, this is also a not fully support the proposal, but also immediately received more than 70 replies, which for a mailing list is super high number, “yes” or “no” variety.
A few days later, Rootstock (RSK) developer SergioDemianLerner has released a hard split proposal. In a sense, it is different from Chun in that it contains two kinds of changes: isolation (witness solution core developer support) and the hard block size parameters (doubling bifurcation of coal miners often express the idea).
Although this idea has won some support, but it is still a complicated response. Not all developers think it is a novel idea. In addition, because it advocates hard bifurcation, many people simply not willing to accept this idea.
BitcoinCore contributor BryanBishop told CoinDesk: “these are hard bifurcation, so in the coming before any short-term activation has not worth considering,” and added:
“If you want to make the controversial hard bifurcation is split into two networks, it is best to choose a new name, a new address prefix, quietly enable replay protection and bifurcation.”
At the meeting, repeatedly
Bifurcation is a major event may not offer only one industry continuously staged.
Digital currency group (DCG) co-founder BarrySilbert has confirmed that the Vc firm will hold another expansion meeting in May. However, not everyone will be as an important milepost type activities.
Bitcoin investors and operators of Bitcoin.com RogerVer in the first list of possible list of participants is that he does not intend to participate in the meeting.
“It has held many meetings, but no one can achieve a lasting agreement, which I agree.”
Such a meeting will be recorded in the history of the expansion of solution method, which also includes a lot of face-to-face meetings.
It is worth mentioning is the famous “Hongkong agreement”, it witnessed some of the developers and the miners on a road map agreed, and then suffered a delay and did not attend the meeting staff objections.
Since then, the opposite expectations would be lower, this is because no one wanted to be regarded as responsible for the agreement or make the fact that decisions on the agreement and worse.
Blockstream CEO AdamBack DCG refused the invitation because he thinks it’s implied by him on behalf of bitcoin volunteer development team.
He wrote in a letter to have a stake in Blockstream investment company in an email:
“People have always assumed the same Blockstream[and Core most probably it did not actually happen, or implied on behalf of bitcoin developers, these two are not correct, so if there is this assumption in the meeting, it will only provide a false statement.”
A gleam of hope
For what or who represents the representative who speak, this chaotic situation continued to increase the difficulty. In fact, no matter how these proposals, some consensus even in the presence of technical solutions, or who will decide what is the problem of agreement.
Users, businesses, miners and developers, although as the exchange turns out to determine who belong to that category, the choice among them is still a challenge.
Blockstream co-founder PieterWuille illustrates the understanding problem in response to Chun’s proposal, he believes that the developer has no power to force users to accept bitcoin changes, such as increasing the block size of 2MB.
He believes that if the BitcoinCore will be in the new version of the software of network activity “blacklist”, if they do not change, then the user can choose not to download the latest version of the software.
However, can still be that although in a negative situation, or to stimulate public discussion to reach a new historical level
In the past week proposed at least three expansion idea, join the past few years has been in the discussion of the solution lineup, it seemed that ongoing dialogue is in sight, but it may not be a bad thing in the context of technological innovation.