Principled Thoughts on Bitcoin Scaling

This article is an article published by Wu Gang, CEO of HaoBTC, on CoinTech. He expressed his views on Bitcoin expansion in a more understandable way. The original content is as follows.

I only went to the Kangding mine for a few days, and I had to post a clarification. This shows how intense the conflict caused by the expansion issue is. However, for this expansion, we need some principled thinking, so that the issue can be more clearly understood.

Don't be a conspiracy theorist. HaoBTC actually has no obvious preference for block size or technical route. Large blocks are good for HaoBTC, as they require less handling fees. Small blocks are good for HaoBTC, as they require more handling fees and can be confirmed quickly. The rise in the price of the currency is better for us, as we can spend less Bitcoin on electricity bills.

Don't guess the motives. If you guess the motives, we will make more awesome guesses. For example, Blockchain.info's main business is to wash coins, so it needs low fees and large blocks. For example, in the case of the Hong Kong consensus, Coinbase is making trouble just to keep the coin price low. These are impolite and irrational.

We believe that blockchain is very valuable. It is the first decentralized mathematical consensus chain in human history and is very valuable and should be cherished.

In the future, never promote or hope that Bitcoin transfers are cheap or free, because if Bitcoin transfers are cheap, then the cost of attacking the Bitcoin blockchain will be very low. For example, with a transaction fee of 0.0001/KB, it only takes 14 BTC to attack the blockchain for one day. The cost of attacking a network worth 15 million BTC is too low.

The decreasing Bitcoin transfer fees indicate a lack of attention to the Bitcoin transfer network security. The Bitcoin transfer fee has dropped from 0.006/KB at the beginning of 2011 to 0.0003/KB now. The defense level has been reduced by 20 times. The attack cost has dropped from 864BTC per day to 44BTC. This change is very unwise.

We need to pay more attention to long-term interests. In the short term, the expansion of Classic is simple, crude and feasible. In the long term, the Classic team still needs to grow to be competent in developing complex SW and LN.

The Core team is still the only mature professional open source team capable of developing complex improvements to Bitcoin. For example, the development of SW and LN requires the Core team.

Bitcoin is an open source project. The original intention of open source projects is that you can do it if you can do it, and don't talk nonsense when you look at the code. Bitcoin is an open source development project that requires a professional development and testing team. Every company has the opportunity to participate in leading the Bitcoin open source project as long as you have enough technical strength.

Every participant in Bitcoin has corresponding voting rights.

Developers can freely choose to organize teams to develop specific Bitcoin versions; miners can vote with their POW computing power to choose to run a specific Bitcoin development version; users can influence the price of Bitcoin by buying and selling, and vote with their feet to express their satisfaction with the Bitcoin development version chosen by miners.

Bitcoin itself is a technology project, and it will eventually return to the technology itself. We believe in technology, and we hope to support mature and stable development teams to increase Bitcoin security, improve Bitcoin's performance and features, and support more Bitcoin transactions.

Copyright Statement: The author reserves all rights. The article is the author's independent opinion and does not represent the position of Babbitt.

I only went to the Kangding mine for a few days, and I had to post a clarification. This shows how intense the conflict caused by the expansion issue is. However, for this expansion, we need some principled thinking, so that the issue can be more clearly understood.

Don't be a conspiracy theorist. HaoBTC actually has no obvious preference for block size or technical route. Large blocks are good for HaoBTC, as they require less handling fees. Small blocks are good for HaoBTC, as they require more handling fees and can be confirmed quickly. The rise in the price of the currency is better for us, as we can spend less Bitcoin on electricity bills.

Don't guess the motives. If you guess the motives, we will make more awesome guesses. For example, Blockchain.info's main business is to wash coins, so it needs low fees and large blocks. For example, in the case of the Hong Kong consensus, Coinbase is making trouble just to keep the coin price low. These are impolite and irrational.

We believe that blockchain is very valuable. It is the first decentralized mathematical consensus chain in human history and is very valuable and should be cherished.

In the future, never promote or hope that Bitcoin transfers are cheap or free, because if Bitcoin transfers are cheap, then the cost of attacking the Bitcoin blockchain will be very low. For example, with a transaction fee of 0.0001/KB, it only takes 14 BTC to attack the blockchain for one day. The cost of attacking a network worth 15 million BTC is too low.

The decreasing Bitcoin transfer fees indicate a lack of attention to the Bitcoin transfer network security. The Bitcoin transfer fee has dropped from 0.006/KB at the beginning of 2011 to 0.0003/KB now. The defense level has been reduced by 20 times. The attack cost has dropped from 864BTC per day to 44BTC. This change is very unwise.

We need to pay more attention to long-term interests. In the short term, the expansion of Classic is simple, crude and feasible. In the long term, the Classic team still needs to grow to be competent in developing complex SW and LN.

The Core team is still the only mature professional open source team capable of developing complex improvements to Bitcoin. For example, the development of SW and LN requires the Core team.

Bitcoin is an open source project. The original intention of open source projects is that you can do it if you can do it, and don't talk nonsense when you look at the code. Bitcoin is an open source development project that requires a professional development and testing team. Every company has the opportunity to participate in leading the Bitcoin open source project as long as you have enough technical strength.

Every participant in Bitcoin has corresponding voting rights.

Developers can freely choose to organize teams to develop specific Bitcoin versions; miners can vote with their POW computing power to choose to run a specific Bitcoin development version; users can influence the price of Bitcoin by buying and selling, and vote with their feet to express their satisfaction with the Bitcoin development version chosen by miners.

Bitcoin itself is a technology project, and it will eventually return to the technology itself. We believe in technology, and we hope to support mature and stable development teams to increase Bitcoin security, improve Bitcoin's performance and features, and support more Bitcoin transactions.

Copyright Statement: The author reserves all rights. The article is the author's independent opinion and does not represent the position of Babbitt.