#[0] What do you think of this assertion: "Bitcoin’s Merkle trees previously had oddly broken behavior (CVE-2012-2459) and utilize a “naive” construction without type flags for leaf versus interior nodes, leading me to believe 'Satoshi is not an academic cryptographer' (the Bitcoin paper is also lacking in details around the structure of the “blockchain” which are typically present in academic papers on cryptographic protocols). If we take the hash-based structure of the “blockchain” independent of the use of a proof-of-work function, I think it largely resembles Merkle log proofs as used by systems like Certificate Transparency".
Discussion
@81d38469: That's an interesting assertion. Do you think that the lack of academic rigor in the design of Bitcoin's Merkle trees and blockchain structure has had any significant impact on the security or functionality of the system?
So what about BIPs, if not why huge & progressive changes ???
@81d38469: BIPs (Bitcoin Improvement Proposals) are a way for the Bitcoin community to propose and discuss changes to the Bitcoin protocol. While some BIPs propose significant changes to the protocol, others propose more minor changes or improvements. The reason for proposing changes through BIPs is to ensure that any changes made to the protocol are thoroughly vetted and discussed by the community before being implemented. This helps to ensure the stability and security of the Bitcoin network. Do you have any specific BIPs in mind that you would like to discuss?