Throwing everything into one bucket called "software" shows a gross misunderstanding of the spectrum here. A *consensus protocol* and an app are both software, but the conditions and need for each to change couldn't be further away from each other.
Tell me the last time you updated your TCP/IP because "it is software and it has to evolve" in order to make your internet better and you'll begin to understand how badly this idea misses the mark.
I've seen a similar issue with "algorithm."
Yea addition and calculus are both just math right? The declaration of independence and green eggs and ham are both just literature right? Bitcoin and notepad are both just software right?
Ah I like that analogy! The Constitution and Wikipedia are both just text right? They both need to evolve!
While it is true that everything in life is transitory, that does not mean that everything is equally in need of change to survive. In fact, changing something without proper exploration of its downstream effects is precisely what destroys them in the first place.
If quantum computing isn't bullshit, it seems like adding "arbitrary user input" to the ledger / mempool should be pretty low on the priority list of "improvements."
I like this analogy because it so apparent the process to change them are so drastically different. As they should be. Constitution requires amendments. Wikipedia, you just click edit.
Spam and porn needs tcp/ip too
Of course, as the protocol is a generic data transfer. And in the same way Bitcoin allows money that porn and spam can use, as they deserve and no money is any good that decides who can use it. But in neither situation does refusing to host or share porn or spam on behalf of others interfere with either of the two former points on TCP/IP or Bitcoin. Anyone can use TCP/IP without forcing someone else to save your porn. Anyone can use Bitcoin as money without forcing anyone else to store porn or share it with others.
Actually, the inability to upgrade TCP/IP has indeed caused problems. I spoke about ossification issues in this talk: https://rumble.com/v6k9uz1-the-curse-of-success-plan-forum-el-salvador-2025.html
Yes, there’s no free lunch. Ossification doesn’t come without tradeoffs just like the alternative does not come without tradeoffs.
I don't think the need to evolve will be a concern once bitcoin starts monetizing again.
Bitcoin uses an individual's greed as an incentive to protect the network.
The incentives & participants change dramatically after a significant increase in purchasing power.
It won't change the opinions of some influencer Devs that much but it will make their opinion less relevant. This prolonged sideways price action tends to challenge people's perspectives & conviction.
This rhetoric for change will all magically disappear at $200K & I don't think it's that far away.
Everything has risk including Bitcoin. There are a lot of comparisons against gold, stocks. I just think these people do not understand Bitcoin because they never compare it to fiat whereas most bitcoiners completely understand fiat.
Further increase in valuation will make change more pushed for not less.
Nope.
The only real use case for decentralised blockchain is money. Everything else is better served by a database.
Monetisation only strengthens this usecase.
Updating my home lan to ipv6 just now. And ...?
I’m so tired of multiplication. It’s stagnant. We need to innovate on basic math or else something bad might happen somewhere eventually…maybe.
Where are you going to store memes if not on the block chain?
How am I supposed to buy a cup of coffee or an acre of land if all I have is this permissionless store of value that I can easily send and receive?
It is like some group wants to destroy bitcoin before the majority of people understand the point of it.
As Michael Saylor said, if he wanted to destroy Bitcoin, all he would do is hire 100 developers and tell them to "make Bitcoin better"
