14 ms·
Bitcoin Core Lead Maintainer Steps Back, Encourages Decentralization
- tempsy 6y agobitcoin appears to have just become another asset that rich people on wall street are hoarding with no real attention or interest in the actual payment mechanism at all. it might as well just be some trading cards being shuffled around.
- vmception 6y agothere will be plenty of articles for you to post that copypasta on, this article isnt about that
- crumbshot 6y agoA highly wasteful one too, in terms of energy consumption. And the negative environmental impact that has. As we head towards a burgeoning climate catastrophe, no-one should be using Bitcoin.
- KronisLV 6y agoAre there any statistics of how much of the total CO2 that's produced by year is caused by computer equipment? Are there any estimates, what percentage of that is caused by mining bitcoins or other cryptocurrencies? What about things like machine learning or rendering video footage? I'm afraid that i couldn't find anything comprehensive, but something like that would be very interesting to explore!
- headmelted 6y agoWhich is a shame, as the technology always has been as impressive as claimed. There was for a long while talk of whether or not the blockchain would ultimately be adopted for state currencies going forward but it's not clear that this is even an ideal use case. As an example, I would personally view it as a good thing (and I know others have different views on this) that the government for tax and law enforcement purposes can view the global transaction log (it would certainly simplify taxes while increasing compliance), but is it a good thing that everyone else can view the transaction log too? Ideally I would like the police and the tax man to know that people are not up to anything nefarious without everyone in the world knowing when you buy birth control or a pregnancy test. The other issue is obviously money supply. Governments like to be able to manage the supply of currency, but deflationary issuances like Bitcoin are clearly incompatible with that goal.
- skohan 6y agoI would argue that claims about the revolutionary potential of blockchain as a technology have been largely exaggerated, but I agree that it's hard to imagine it replacing the financial system in its current state. It just doesn't seem like it could possibly scale to the number of transactions which have to be made globally every second. That's not to say there aren't technical solutions to some of these problems, but currently it seems like even if less than 1% of the population tried to start using bitcoin as their only currency, the system would collapse under its own weight. I actually think it might be interesting for something like voting. Here having a completely public, verifiable record would add a lot to what is currently a very opaque system in a lot of places.
- headmelted 6y agoI thought about how it would be good for voting in the past - again though, not as a public transaction log (how you vote being public could get you killed in some places).
- skohan 6y agoI'm not an expert, but it seems as if you could make this process both anonymous and verifiable. I.e. the number and authenticity of votes is verifiable through cryptography, but the identity of the voter is not accessible.
- skohan 6y agoEven that is an extremely charitable interpretation. From what I can tell, Bitcoin seems largely to be an engine for fraud: fake value is injected into the system via dollar-pegged tokens like Tether, retail "investors" pile in to chase rising asset prices, and then the bottom drops out, amidst "liquidity issues" at major exchanges which prevent people from pulling out at the top. Or at least that is what happened in 2017. I don't see any evidence that institutional wall street investors are adopting bitcoin in any real way.
- headmelted 6y agoThere does appear to be some evidence of this, but again, you can be an institutional fund manager and still speculating. It's simultaneously described as a currency for exchange, a store of value and a speculative asset, but logically it cannot be all of these things simultaneously. As an example, it fell quite sharply the other day while gold and stocks treaded water. Is it going to $1 or $1 billion? I have no idea. But whatever is, it's certainly not reliably static.
- Wh1zz 6y agoPayPal will be supporting BTC payments soon. BlackRock just announced providing exposure to BTC in some of their funds very soon.
- skohan 6y agoAgain, there are some institutional investors dabbling in this, but I would like to see evidence that this is more than a rounding error in terms of Bitcoin's total market cap.
- imtringued 6y agoWhy would I want to pay capital gains taxes on things I order online? There is also the obvious problem that spending your Bitcoin is foolish because it is deflationary. Remember the Bitcoin pizza?
- wcoenen 6y agoThe dream of using bitcoin as p2p digital cash does seem to be dead for now, the fees are too high for that[1]. Lightning hasn't really taken off for that use case either, the number of bitcoins in Lightning channels appears to have stopped growing.[2] But it looks like bitcoin can still be very useful as an alternative settlement layer for international payments. Either directly for large payments, or under the hood for something like Strike[3]. [1] https://ycharts.com/indicators/bitcoin_average_transaction_fee https://ycharts.com/indicators/bitcoin_average_transaction_f... [2] https://bitcoinvisuals.com/ln-capacity https://bitcoinvisuals.com/ln-capacity [3] https://jimmymow.medium.com/announcing-strike-global-2392b908f611 https://jimmymow.medium.com/announcing-strike-global-2392b90...
- skohan 6y agoAs someone who lives my life in two currencies, my main hope for Bitcoin circa 2014 was that it would make for simpler and cheaper international transactions and currency conversions. I don't know if the situation has gotten any better, but around 2015/2016 this seemed untenable due to high transaction costs, and volatility. I'm not sure I understand what would be the value of using cryptocurrency under the hood for something like Strike. If they are settling the payments themselves, why not just use a simple database to reconcile their transactions?
- wcoenen 6y ago> I'm not sure I understand what would be the value of using cryptocurrency under the hood for something like Strike. If they are settling the payments themselves, why not just use a simple database to reconcile their transactions? A multi-country payment service can indeed just update their database. But If there is a net flow of value between countries, then they will still have to move that value over slower and more expensive traditional systems. If they implement fast transfers for their users on top of those slow systems, then that means they need idle capital waiting in each destination country so that they can front the money to the receiver. This adds cost and complexity: interface with traditional systems, capital opportunity cost, need to forecast demand, need to do currency hedging, ... Transfering via bitcoin and converting via exchanges on both ends eliminates that problem. It also makes it easy to partner with other payment services that do the same, while minimizing the need for trust.
- joshxyz 6y agoAt this state its not really intended for micro txs. Its large txs and the energy spent (yes, spent, not wasted) on the math is what secures it. Your keys, your bitcoin. 1 USD = 0.99 USD tomorrow. 1 BTC will always be 1 BTC.
- 3stripe 6y agoI like the sound of a P2P distributed code collaboration platform...
- isoprophlex 6y agoI wonder how these Bitcoin devs rationalize the environmental impact their ongoing work has. They've created something that started as a revolutionary innovation, but by now is an incredibly wasteful way of turning kWhs into money. Something that has outlived its fitness as a payment system, but still trundles on due to its own inertia. Like oil execs that refuse to acknowledge that the age of oil is coming to a close, and are now pushing shale oil extraction. A suboptimal waste of effort.
- crumbshot 6y agoProbably the same way most people rationalize consuming the flesh of slaughtered animals, despite the massive negative environmental impact that has, and the better alternatives that are available.
- pawelmurias 6y agoFlesh of slaughtered animals is super tasty and nutritious.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- garbagetime 6y agoThat seems like a somewhat random point to make. Sure, there are positive characteristics of meat - just like there are of bitcoin. That's part of why the comparison between the two works.
- randomguy3344 6y agoIn terms of conversation you got a point yourself, however you cannot compare food with currency. Food is connected to us on a biological level, currency is a construct of society. They are not compareable imo.
- vmception 6y agoIts a nice introspection that this person realize they were a centralized bottleneck I’ve seen similar things happen in other cryptocurrency communities, where the primary binaries being released needed one person who was out on a conference circuit or vacation The infrastructure is mature enough to distribute signing and other duties more adequately, as this person has asked
- RichardHeart 6y agoThe public has no idea how important the developers in charge of the code they run are. Underhanded C contests (The Underhanded C Contest is a programming contest to turn out code that is malicious, but passes a rigorous inspection, and looks like an honest mistake even if discovered.) make you really want honest guys upstream, and lots of eyes on things that affect consensus.
- spacerocking 6y agoEspecially when there are people that run scams like hex coin. Oh wow look it's the creator of that scam right here
- nolim1t 6y agoNext step less reliance on Github for management too
- 1ark 6y agoRadicle.xyz, or something else?
- nikolay 6y agoCan you give me an example of a successful widescale fully decentralized software project?
- fsflover 6y agoEmail.
- nikolay 6y agoNot a good example. Email is just protocol. I'm talking about a single piece of software, built in a fully-distributed manner without centralization.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- xenihn 6y agothe internet
- nikolay 6y agoNot a good example, sorry. I'm asked for a distinct piece of software, not a set of protocols.
- everfree 6y ago* Web browsers that all use a standardized name resolution and data transfer protocol to transmit hyperlinked documents * Email
- nikolay 6y ago
- esimov 6y agoI was wondering if these developers have any ethical concerns about the environmental impact they are responsible for by developing a technology which I can categorize with a single world: ABSURDITY!
- quotemstr 6y agoThere is no such thing as unethical technology.
- esimov 6y agoWe are talking about the ethical concerns of the people behind the technology. Do not try to misinterpret the words.
- joshxyz 6y agoReposting the 300 IQ comment i replied to someone else on this thread: Thats just lame and missing the entire point of bitcoin lol. I dont even know where to start, the fact that you're really criticizing bitcoin when you got factories cars and plastics around you, or the fact that the energy isnt wasted but spent to secure and preserve its speculated market value. Sure, we could just use fiat (paper money), it's eco-friendly, right? But good luck in dealing with inflation lol. Simple math for all: your 1 USD today is 0.99x tomorrow, while 1 BTC will always = 1 BTC.
- b10c 6y agoThe "stepping back", as mentioned in the title, doesn't summarize what's happening here. laanwj decided to delegate some of his lead maintainer tasks to others with aim to further improve the decentralization and reducing the attack surface. He want to continue to work on Bitcoin an Bitcoin Core. Most recently, this became relevant as the bitcoincore.org website he (co-)maintains received a legal letter from a (fraudulent; as in unproven and repeatedly lying) entity claiming copyright of the 2008 Bitcoin whitepaper. He complied[0] by taking the PDF down from bitcoincore.org and received a lot of slack for it by parts of the community. He then made clear that he'll happily continue to work on Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin in general, but will not be a "martyr"[1] for the project: "it's up to you as bitcoiners to protect it". As a reaction a lot of community members and companies proceeded to host the PDF on their site [2]. [0]: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/740 https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/740 [1]: https://twitter.com/orionwl/status/1352181235766988800 https://twitter.com/orionwl/status/1352181235766988800 [2]: https://twitter.com/hashtag/BitcoinPDF https://twitter.com/hashtag/BitcoinPDF
- AdamSignups 6y agoAre they rushing something or is there another wall that the world of crypto has to break?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- nullc 6y agoTitle replaced with inaccurate editorializing, flagged.
- esimov 6y agoI cannot recommend enough for everyone who has a minimal sensibility towards the climate impact to read this thread: https://twitter.com/smdiehl/status/1350869944888664064 https://twitter.com/smdiehl/status/1350869944888664064. Since we are inevitable heading over to a climate catastrophe it's really the time to advocate against bitcoin.
- gogopuppygogo 6y ago#truth It’s also a good time to explore the tether bubble: https://link.medium.com/Wsf1ZmBT7cb https://link.medium.com/Wsf1ZmBT7cb
- emteycz 6y agoThis thread does not answer the predominant usage of waste electricity by Bitcoin miners. Can't take it seriously without any mention of that. Bitcoin is mined where it makes profit, and you can't make any profit without using waste electricity. Today's mining hardware is smart enough to turn off when the powerplant signals there is too much demand and no waste (thus increased prices), and turn back on when convenient.
- gjs278 6y agoyou just wasted electricity posting
- preya2k 6y agoDo you have any sources to undermine your statement that miners predominantly use waste electricity?
- emteycz 6y agoSimply look at prices and rewards. You literally can't have any profit without using waste electricity. The price of ordinary industrial electricity anywhere in the world is at least double of what you can mine with the latest Bitcoin mining hardware (which is expensive to begin with). BTW, what if the demand for Bitcoin mining hardware accelerated our technological or economical development of semiconductors? I think that's good, and the electricity is small price for that.
- gorgoiler 6y agoI don’t understand Bitcoin. If I make bread and you grow potatoes, we can barter, but it’s much easier to use some intermediary to track the value that we exchanged. The intermediary facilitates this with tokens (coins, notes, cards.) Bitcoin seems perverse. It puts all the value in the tokens themselves and at the same time I can’t even use it to buy bread or potatoes. About the only thing I hear that you can buy with Bitcoin is USD, and even the liquidity of that seems questionable beyond a certain amount — the millions maybe but probably not billions.
- heckerhut 6y agoRead Debt by Graeber so you can stop believing in the myth of barter. Then think again.
- forgotmypw77 6y agoi don,t think it is a myth, i do it all the time, living almost entirely without currency. digital technology only makes barter more easy and accessible. converting every trade into numbers and back is an outmoded method, which i think will become less used with time.
- 317070 6y agoThat is basically what the book is telling. You are probably not tit-for-tat bartering, but taking on debts and returning things you owe in some more vague approach. History went through multiple cycles where currency went in disuse in favor of just tracking and settling debts.
- forgotmypw77 6y agoactually, i,m gifting without asking for anything in return. when i need something, it is offered or i ask.
- 317070 6y ago
- vaduz 6y agoIt's a nice post, but it is a shame that the author does not mention certain current controversy [0] where Bitcoin Core has crumpled like a wet paper bag under a thread of lawsuit by one Craig Steven Wright - one that he played a key role in [1]. The PR to revert that change is still open and locked [2] so I can only imagine what kind of direct messages he would be receiving - I doubt many of them would be what one would consider 'nice'. Not to mention any of it when stepping back seems a little incredulous. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25858901 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25858901 [1] https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/740 https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/740 [2] https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/744 https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/744
- runeks 6y agoI think the people who are critical of the wastefulness of Bitcoin fail to factor in the usefulness of a store of value. Whether you like it or not, human beings find a need to store value. In countries without a proper store of value -- due to e.g. government intervention -- they start hoarding commodities (e.g. wheat, cotton) or productive assets like cars. So the question becomes whether having something like Bitcoin as a replacement for hoarding useful assets is actually environmentally preferable. Hoarding millions of cars as a store of value -- as they do in e.g. Argentina -- also impacts the environment, as we need to produce more cars to account for it. So if hoarding bitcoins replaces this practice, perhaps it will become a net benefit for the environment. Of course, this point of view assumes the inevitability of hoarding. As far as I can see, it's a survival instinct, which cannot be suppressed -- we can only control which goods are hoarded. Ban money and people will start hoarding less saleable goods.
- kaonashi 6y agoLots of things can be used as stores of value that don't require the electrical output of a medium sized country.
- runeks 6y agoI disagree. The only asset that falls into this category is credit. And credit is not a good -- it's a promise that someone will deliver a good to you when you demand it. And this type of promise tends to be broken just when you need it the most.
- ericb 6y agoProof of stake coins exist and work just fine. Tezos. Ethereum.
- runeks 6y agoProof-of-stake has different properties than proof-of-work. For example, given n different chains, proof-of-work (PoW) reaches consensus simply by choosing the chain with the most work — irrespective of block contents. Proof-of-stake (PoS), on the other hand, requires granting special meaning to a particular public key (in the first block) in order to reach consensus. So PoW reaches consensus without granting special meaning to any public key while PoS requires this in order to work.
- gioscarab 6y ago> We need a decentralized web. For us, one option would be IPFS, which is starting to catch on. For the binaries themselves there’s already the option of downloading through torrents. I agree with the OP Bitcoin should run over a network protocol like PJON https://github.com/gioblu/PJON https://github.com/gioblu/PJON and a private network infrastructure made by people. The point is, if you switch just the protocol, and keep the same infrastructure nothing will change.
- alexmingoia 6y agoBitcoin has satellite-connectivity, no need for Internet connectivity: https://blockstream.com/satellite/ https://blockstream.com/satellite/
- CryptoPunk 6y agoPeople like this shouldn't be leading a project that threatens to upend multi-trillion dollar institutions. If it weren't for his timidity, Bitcoin would have hard forked in 2015 to raise the block size limit to allow for mass-adoption.
- b10c 6y agoThere is no single leader in Bitcoin.
- CryptoPunk 6y agoHe could have authorized the hard fork.
- robjan 6y agoThe miners are ultimately the ones who decide whether to fork or not.
- jart 6y agoMiners can't change Bitcoin without the consent of full nodes, who run the core client. That's why SegWit2x didn't happen three years ago. All the miners supported it, because bigger blocks means bigger transaction fees. Full nodes and core devs didn't support it, because big blocks means you won't be able to run Bitcoin on PCs much longer and therefore centralized online service providers will control it.
- nullc 6y agoFWIW bigger blocks actually mean much much smaller transaction fees, both in theory and practice. Though it's true some miners erroneously believed arguments otherwise. BCash, for example, some loopy "large block" clone of Bitcoin has only rarely had more than $1 in fees in blocks-- and not primarily because it has fewer transactions (though it does), but because there is no cause to pay more than negligible amounts when both capacity isn't scarce and mining isn't completely centralized. The result is that the BitcoinUnlimited (one of the BCash clients) "chief scientist" proposes that security must be paid for by perpetual inflation... and they've been moving towards abandoning Bitcoin's decentralized consensus-- e.g. bcash clients will no longer reorg so if there is a split deeper than a few blocks (caused by a network partition or a block race), their nodes will just split off into separate networks. Quite a mess.
- joshspankit 6y agoThis is one of the very rare times where a post from someone leaving has left me with a sense that the company/project will increase in value