A collective statement from 31 Bitcoin core developers has sparked a global debate between Bitcoiners after suggesting a hands-off approach to how the Bitcoin network is used, amid ongoing controversy over non-monetary use cases.
“This is not endorsing or condoning non-financial data usage, but accepting that as a censorship-resistant system, Bitcoin can and will be used for use cases not everyone agrees on,” the June 6 statement published on the Bitcoin Core website said.
Bitcoiners are “not in a position” to place mandates
The letter argued that Bitcoin is a network “defined by its users” and that its core contributors are “not in a position” to mandate what software or policies they desire. It comes amid the ongoing debate over spam inscriptions on the Bitcoin network.
“Being free to run any software is the network’s primary safeguard against coercion,” it added.
While many Bitcoiners supported the update with an “ACK” comment, others objected.
JAN3 CEO Samson Mow criticized the tone of the letter on the same day. He said, “It’s disingenuous to just say “it is what it is now, too bad.”
“Bitcoin Core devs have been changing the network gradually to enable spam and now seem focused on also removing barriers for spammers,” Mow said. “This statement itself is also inappropriate,” he added.
On May 8, Bitcoin Core developers decided to remove a long-standing limit on transaction data in a network upgrade to allow for larger data segments, which some Bitcoiners saw as opening the door to non-financial use cases.
However, Casa founder Jameson Lopp defended the letter. Lopp said, “Core Devs are a group saying we can’t force anyone to run code they don’t like; here is our thinking on relay policy and network health.”
“When there was no cohesive message, and it was just a bunch of independent developers making individual statements, Bitcoin Core was accused of having “poor public relations,” Lopp said, adding:
“Now a joint statement is published, and people find reasons to cry about it.”
The developers argued in the letter that it is better for the Bitcoin node software “to aim to have a realistic idea of what will end up in the next block, rather than attempting to intervene between consenting transaction creators and miners to discourage activity that is largely harmless at a technical level.” It added:
“While we recognize that this view isn’t held universally by all users and developers, it is our sincere belief that it is in the best interest of Bitcoin and its users, and we hope our users agree.”
Related: Is a Bitcoin price rally to $150K possible by year’s end?
Bitcoiner Carl Horton said, “It’s Bit “Coin” not Bit “Bucket” or Bit “Store” or whatever general purpose data store you have in mind. It’s a “peer to peer electronic cash system.”
Meanwhile, Bitcoin core developer Luke Dashjr criticized the goals of the transaction relay policy outlined in the statement. “The goals of transaction relay listed are basically all wrong,” Dashjr said.
“Predicting what will be mined is a centralizing goal. Expecting spam to be mined is defeatism. Helping spam propagate is harmful,” Dashjr said.
The developers said the main goals of transaction relay are predicting what Bitcoin transactions will be mined, “speeding up block propagation” for the transactions expected to be mined, and helping Bitcoin miners learn about fee-paying transactions.
Magazine: Baby boomers worth $79T are finally getting on board with Bitcoin
