Do You Think The Bitcoin Community is Streched Over too Many Projects?
331 sats \ 25 comments \ @tomlaies 26 Aug 2022 bitcoin
I'm talking not only payment technologies with Lightning: Hosted Channels, Submarine Swaps, Fedimint, Liquid ... but also side projects like Umbrel bazillion projects, Sphinx ecosystem bazillion projects, Nostr, Impervious Browser aims to do everything...
When is it too much? When are we streched too thin? Many project and all with too few users. One of the main selling points of Bitcoin was it's simplicity and rock solid code due to no gimmicks and waste on the main chain. Has Bitcoin as an ecosystem still this advantage?
The road into anarchy and chaos is a spectrum. And when these projects will not be brand new anymore one day we might hear about security problems left and right. That's my fear.
write
preview
related posts
182 sats \ 1 reply \ @TomApollo 26 Aug 2022
The simplicity on the main chain is unchanged. The experimentation on higher layers is a good thing! The 'many projects and too few users' argument could literally be used for all start ups in every industry. That's just the nature of it.
Most of these experiments will fail and that's okay; the ones that work will make a huge impact
reply
150 sats \ 0 replies \ @tomlaies OP 26 Aug 2022
The 'many projects and too few users' argument could literally be used for all start ups in every industry. That's just the nature of it.
With the difference that we could agree on one protocol and build free market competition on a network of one protocol. That's essentially the successstory of Bitcoin and Lightning as well.
reply
153 sats \ 6 replies \ @Modus 26 Aug 2022
You're not wrong. All the comments so far are negative, so I guess I'm the first person that agrees with you. I think there is plenty of time and effort being wasted. I have my own personal opinion about which projects are wasting their time, and the problem is that others won't agree with me. I think it will turn out okay. Some consolidation will probably occur.
reply
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @cameri 26 Aug 2022
It doesn't make any sense to me but maybe I'm the dumb one.
Are we really saying that we as a collective should stop building new stuff, stop innovating, and exploring ideas? That goes against every single startup out there. Heck, it goes against our nature since our survival depends on many many different humans trying out things and seeing what sticks.
Whoever holds this view isn't a builder just a user. And also risk averse and fear driven because of sEcUrITYYYYyy.
Bitcoin is a layer, and there will be many layers on top, like lightning, which allow Stacker News to exist.
Bitcoin has inspired many other projects that aren't even Bitcoin related but humans creativity and ingenuity has no limits and won't be deterred.
The only limit here is the mindset of "we have too much choice so let's pack up and go home."
reply
200 sats \ 1 reply \ @Modus 28 Aug 2022
Whoever holds this view isn't a builder just a user
So many builders think other builders are wasting their time. Often building is motivated by the idea that the other guy is doing it wrong. Why is there umbrel, citadel os, and start9? Because they each think the others are not doing it right.
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @cameri 28 Aug 2022
You are right on that.
I'd like to add to what you said:
Considering that just because X project exists does not mean anyone can or wants to contribute to it. Their way or your idea on how to do things may be the reason why you may have or want to go your own way and spin the same thing with just a different color.
I've seen a case of someone contributing to Umbrel, just to have the main devs reject their PR and implement their own sub-par solution. Umbrel is not as open as people think they are so I wouldn't be caught attempting to contribute.
On request from the main developer, I submitted a PR for a project to balance LN channels which I will not name and the same person took my commits and pushed it to his project as if he did the work. I would not consider contributing my time to that either.
Sometimes the best way for a set of individuals is to spin up their own thing and hope it catches up.
Having too much choice is not a real problem, having too little is.
People's creativity shouldn't be hampered by one random guy's idea of what we should and should not build. The market will decide for itself regardless of what we think.
reply
24 sats \ 2 replies \ @tomlaies OP 27 Aug 2022
Are we really saying that we as a collective should stop building new stuff, stop innovating, and exploring ideas?
No. Learn to read, my children learned that at the age of 5. Or maybe you're tech-illiterate and don't know the difference between a program and a protocol.
Whoever holds this view isn't a builder just a user. And also risk averse and fear driven because of sEcUrITYYYYyy
No offense but it sounds like you're a user that joined Bitcoin in 2020 instead of being in the cyber/cypher underground for 20 years. Go ask a LND or CLN dev what they think about the two implementations of the same protocol was a bad idea - No, they will say it's f*cking awesome. Then ask if they should split and make 2 incompatible protocols out of it
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @cameri 27 Aug 2022
Your extensive use of ad hominems and other fallacies serves to demonstrate the frailty and lack of merit of your argument. You just can't allow anyone to hold a different opinion from yours, can you? You immediately start dispatching insults left and right without addressing the points I've laid out.
I'm willing to be proven wrong but with your attitude and the way you convey yourself it is becoming increasingly hard to get you seriously.
The real waste is this post. Touché.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @NetWt1oz 27 Aug 2022
https://giphy.com/clips/ralph-friday-damn-chris-tucker-WqxqV4WWv7yftHpO4o
reply
110 sats \ 0 replies \ @NordlysLN 26 Aug 2022
I for one find the level of experimentation to be a great thing for the eco system. More developers should realize what great potential there is in building things on top of Bitcoins base layer.
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @rijndael 27 Aug 2022
People can do what they want.
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @purpurato 26 Aug 2022
reply
55 sats \ 0 replies \ @cryptocoin 26 Aug 2022
When is it too much?
Wait til you hear about what's going on over in shitcoinlandia.
reply
62 sats \ 0 replies \ @nerd2ninja 26 Aug 2022
Its the free marketplace of ideas. Several people are making several things based entirely on their personal interests. You have it worded like Bitcoin is a company with limited personnel, but the phenomena you're describing is merely human action, not directed by an central authority.
No one asks "Is humanity focused on created too many websites" or insert your gripe you think may be a waste of time here. A lot of the projects you mentioned will surely never enter the minds of people outside of a few deep in the rabbit hole, but the people behind them believe in them, even if only for the few who are daily users.
reply
14 sats \ 0 replies \ @kilianbuhn 26 Aug 2022
It's still early days, many of these projects will die. Even if I like every individual project very much.
I hope the winner in the end will be an API of interoperable projects - like LND and CLN.
I hope Bitcoin-core does that too in 20 years when the dust has settled and there is no doubt that Bitcoin-core is bug free. 😎😎
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @tech5 27 Aug 2022
No
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 26 Aug 2022
But all the things you mentioned... they're not bitcoin. They may use bitcoin, but they're not bitcoin. And some will succeed and some will fail, but the underlying bitcoin code remains rock solid, as you said, with no gimmicks.
Does it lead to waste on the main chain? I say let the economics take care of that. If a project turns out to have no users then eventually there will be no more demand from it for space on the main chain.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @tomlaies OP 26 Aug 2022
Not Bitcoin or Lightning themselves, I'm satisfied with that. It's more the community/ecosystem
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @cameri 26 Aug 2022
There will certainly be an explosion of projects regarding Bitcoin and this diversity is desirable. We gain immunity and resiliency by the numbers. Let there be chaos.
reply
105 sats \ 1 reply \ @tomlaies OP 26 Aug 2022
We gain immunity and resiliency by the numbers.
That's an incredibly dumb take. Number 1 rule of cryptography is Kerckhoffs's principle (from the 1880sit's like literally the very foundation of everything in Bitcoin) is that security is only derived from the protocol and the key.
That implicity means that we never ever ever derive security from obscurity or trying not to get targeted.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @cameri 26 Aug 2022
Most projects and ideas will die eventually since they will not become profitable or worthy of anyone's attention, but allowing for experimentation means eventually good ideas and projects will rise. You want people to experiment not to end up with like 1 option they hate or else. Citing principles to sound smart and getting personal speaks more about you than it does about me. Think about that.
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @go 26 Aug 2022
yeah... we should have leadership to centralize us!!
reply
12 sats \ 2 replies \ @tomlaies OP 26 Aug 2022
Shut up, that's not what I mean and you know that.
E.g. the Lightning Network is decentralized and users have the choice between CLN and LND but the community is laser focused on the Lightning protocol instead of 20 separate/incompatible protocols and communities.
reply
33 sats \ 1 reply \ @go 26 Aug 2022
Sorry, not trying to make enemies, just being light hearted. Your point stands on good ground
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @tomlaies OP 26 Aug 2022
reply