pull down to refresh
1219 sats \ 2 replies \ @udiWertheimer 29 Sep 2023 \ parent \ on: Stacker News Roundtable #1 - Building on Bitcoin, Bitcoin Culture, and More bitcoin
I think the concept of bitcoin being inevitable is relatively new. Sure, some people used to say that early on too, but that notion got much more popular and the last few years.
In reality, most generations of bitcoiners believed that some things need to be done in order for it to succeed. “Things” in all walks of life, but our topic here is building so I’ll focus on that.
Lightning for example, couldn’t have happened if we hadn’t soft forked bitcoin THREE times first in order to enable it (CLTV, CSV, SegWit). People forget that, but it was never the case that you don’t upgrade bitcoin to enable new things!
I don’t think anyone can tell us “what needs to be built”; the only way to find out is for people to build whatever crazy things they want, and see how the market reacts.
the only way to find out is for people to build whatever crazy things they want, and see how the market reacts.
how do you square this idea with the concern that making changes to bitcoin could irreparably harm bitcoin?
do you have any frameworks for thinking about the trade-offs of enabling experimentation vs. preventing unforced errors on the base layer?
the two ideas seem to be at odds with each other
reply
I definitely prefer the type of experimentation that DOES NOT require changing bitcoin. Like ordinals. Personally I intend to focus most on my time on that type of experimentation, but not all of it. At some point I think that some potential changes reveal themselves as worthwhile and they should be pursued.
I think bitcoin itself should be changed slowly, carefully and meticulously, but that’s not the same as not being changed at all, or being afraid to change it, which I think it a more precise description of what’s going on recently.
reply