I predicted this would happen, for third time. Splits are not isolated events, it is a cyclic pattern of conflict. When the consensus mechanism is not established by voting with hashpower, as the whitepaper specifically indicates, in the last two sentences.
I suggest you read the first page of my second paper: https://virtualpol.com/BMP_EN.pdf
Currently, the Bitcoin miners estimate consensus with inadequate coordination.
This causes contentious hardforks that divide the blockchain, fracture the community, create confusion and damage adoption. Miners can take responsibility, better than anyone else, for preventing the risk of such events happening again.
In the process of technological development, often crossroads arise with two valid but incompatible solutions in the same blockchain. Therefore, technological development requires decision-making.
The human tendency to become entangled in conflict is a predictable pattern. With multiple development teams competing, confrontation is only a matter of time. To resolve this, miners must assume their executive role.
Moreover, in a technological race, the acceleration vector is a decisive factor that makes the difference. Global adoption will be conquered by the blockchain capable of evolving technologically at a faster rate.
For a successful global adoption to be possible, Bitcoin miners must coordinate effectively.
Add to this a competition for donations based on social engineering.
The long-term solution is already built and running: https://bmp.virtualpol.com
Unfortunately, Bitcoinland needs a third split risk event.
Then, the need for the BMP will be evident.
No comments:
Post a Comment