Ethereum Fiasco Justifies Principled Decisions of Bitcoin Developers

in #ethereum8 years ago

 Ethereum, a network still in its infancy which was introduced on July 30, 2015, is already dealing with a major conflict amongst its community  as a result of a hard fork which was implemented without the full consensus of the community.  Even worse, the hard fork was executed to benefit a certain party of the Ethereum community, not the network as a whole.  

Bitcoin and scaling dilemma 

Bitcoin Core developers and the Blockstream team have  constantly received heavy criticism over the past few years from the  Bitcoin community for their inability to reach consensus on the  everlasting blocksize debate.  Eventually, as the Bitcoin network and its underlying  technologies matured, a number of sophisticated proposals emerged, such  as Segregated Witness and the Lightning network, to scale the network in a more cautious manner.  In contempt of the Bitcoin core developer team’s practical  approaches of dealing with the expanding blocksize, many members of the  community, including startups and entrepreneurs, have called for an  execution of hard fork to instantaneously enlarge the Bitcoin block  size.  Yet, the Bitcoin Core developers remained devoted in the  development of various scaling technologies and proposals to optimize  the Bitcoin network with minimum effect to the protocol and users.  As Edan Yago, CEO of Epiphyte Corporation, notes  the developers’ innovative approaches in dealing with the network’s  scaling dilemma allowed Bitcoin to survive for over 7 years, without any  significant fork or chain split.  

Ethereum hard fork and and its impact on Bitcoin network 

Granted, the proposals and suggestions to launch a hard  fork on the Bitcoin network could be justified, since they may serve the  network an appropriate purpose. The issue with a hard fork is, the  unforecasted and unpredictable result it will bring to the network.  The Bitcoin Core developers, who have proven to be  skeptical, philosophical, and confident with their technical knowledge  of the network, are aware of both the negative impact a small block size  could bring to the Bitcoin industry and the unpredictable nature of a  hard fork.  

Read More Source...

Sort:  

Hi! I am a content-detection robot. This post is to help manual curators; I have NOT flagged you.
Here is similar content:
https://cointelegraph.com/news/ethereum-fiasco-justifies-principled-decisions-of-bitcoin-developers
NOTE: I cannot tell if you are the author, so ensure you have proper verification in your post (or in a reply to me), for humans to check!

EdanYago Edan Yago tweeted @ 27 Jul 2016 - 06:17 UTC

Bitcoin has survived over 7 years without any significant fork or chain split. And it did so without the benefit of other chains experience.

Disclaimer: I am just a bot trying to be helpful.