Game of Bluffs? With UAHF, Bitcoin Scaling Becomes Digital 'Missile Crisis'
From CoinDesk
Long a sort of Cold War, bitcoin's scaling debate is escalating into what may be best described as a digital Cuban Missile Crisis.Read the full article here: http://www.coindesk.com/game-of-bluffs-with-bitmain-plan-bitcoin-scaling-becomes-digital-missile-crisis/No longer open for diplomacy, users of the $40bn economic network, which hit an all-time high in value last weekend, are now in the midst of evaluating an ever-increasing array of threats from various network stakeholders, each of whom is seeking to steer discourse and development.
In yet another turn to the scaling debate, major mining firm Bitmain revealed yesterday a strategy outlining how it will respond should a controversial bitcoin code upgrade known as BIP 148 – a change the firm opposes – activate later this summer.
In a blog post, the company outlined its "contingency plan" if users attempt to force a protocol change, thereby circumventing the network's current structure in which those running its mining machines signal for upgrades.
Most notably, the proposal would dedicate mining resources to hard forking the network to a rule set with a larger block size – an upgrade that would likely result in two bitcoin networks and two tradeable bitcoin assets.
In response, the firm, long the center of bitcoin's long-running debate and often the foil to the open-source network's developers, invited the wider bitcoin community to join the effort.
Lay of the land
Admittedly, there been many proposals that could have lead to a network split over the last few years of bitcoin's scaling debate, but none have panned out so far.
In recent weeks, action has increased, though, with groups starting to form around two scaling proposals, SegWit2x and BIP 148. Each hopes to usher in a code change known as Segregated Witness (SegWit) in a different way. But, each also has a risk of splitting bitcoin into two assets and impacting the value of the network and its users. (Although, as of this morning, it looks like the two proposals might be made compatible.)
As such, the proposals have been highly politicized, creating market uncertainty and confusion that has arguably exacerbated a diversification by investors into other digital assets.
For instance, some have gone as far as to call BIP 148's activation date bitcoin’s "Independence Day" since it pushes through a change without requesting miners to signal support for it first. Philosophically, the movement takes the argument that bitcoin's mining was never meant to be so centralized, and that those that contribute resources to securing its ledger weren't meant to have outsized control.
But, Bitmain, among others, disagrees that BIP 148's user-activated soft fork (UASF) is the best way to push through upgrades to the cryptocurrency. As have others, the group is citing public safety in its comments.
"BIP148 is very dangerous for exchanges and other business," the firm's post reads.
Elsewhere, the company has described its plan to hard fork as a way to save users from the consequences of a split once BIP 148 activates.
Follow @contentjunkie to stay up to date on more great posts like this one.
I can't wait to see what happens August 1st
interesante, es bueno saberlo
gracias por la información
This post has been ranked within the top 80 most undervalued posts in the second half of Jun 15. We estimate that this post is undervalued by $25.32 as compared to a scenario in which every voter had an equal say.
See the full rankings and details in The Daily Tribune: Jun 15 - Part II. You can also read about some of our methodology, data analysis and technical details in our initial post.
If you are the author and would prefer not to receive these comments, simply reply "Stop" to this comment.