[bitcoin-dev] Annoucing Not-BitcoinXT

NxtChg nxtchg at hush.com
Tue Aug 18 09:46:11 UTC 2015


Eric,

>FWIW...

These are all good points and I agree with most of them. Yes, the block size debate is a lucky historical accident, which makes it easier for XT to pull off the split, but that's not the point.

The point is, the split _must_ happen because the centralized governance of Bitcoin became a bigger problem than the risks of a fork or larger blocks.

You cannot govern a decentralized currency with a centralized entity.

That's why we shouldn't fear hard forks - they are the new reality, and if we cannot set up a reliable process for them to happen then there _is_ no decentralized Bitcoin and we all might as well just give up and go home.

----

And that's why it would be nice to have a more complex voting mechanism in the block header (see this proposal for the new header format, for example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151698) and other initiatives to make forking more reliable and user choice easier.

This is a better path than trying to suppress all forks by dictatorship methods of the few currently in power.



More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list