pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @standardcrypto 17h \ parent \ on: Are we close to consensus for Bitcoin's next upgrade? bitcoin
I'm coming around to the notion that as long as the covenant SF is largely pushed by ark (and other suspicious actors), a political coalition is ruled out.
even if there are non-ark reasons for it (channel factories perhaps), the waters are just too muddied.
so we will get a boring consensus cleanup in 2026, and the endless covenant debates will continue potentially well into the 2030s.
YAGNI logic wins; fear mongering that SF will only continue to be possible briefly into the near future before ossification sets in, loses.
Consensus "cleanup" afaik is being pushed primarily by Spiral, a shady and seemingly hostile NGO... It's as much a cleanup as the inflation reduction act reduced inflation.
Can't take anyone seriously about their care for Lightning improvements unless they've been on record for some time in favor of APO, else they're inconsistent.
This is why Bitcoin Core is the biggest risk to Bitcoin, because all it does is attract lobbying), a single repo resting on the reputation of developers past that people now just blindly upgrade from without any thought to changes that are made or not made.
All it does is attract lobbying and so it should be archived so people are forced to research alternative implementations based on merit.
reply