Nitesh @nitesh - 7d
My hot take: Bitcoin core kinda sucks because it's decentralized. I prefer projects with leaders who can set the direction and make decisions.
55461 - 7d
ETH has a lot of projects. Working on projects like bos and blixt makes you depending on this decentralized core mess. You can do better. .... ... ... Really happy to have you working on bos and blixt. 🫂
Who are scared to make any decisions. It's leaderless.
I said bitcoin core the software. Not Bitcoin the network.
Yes, unfortunately I'm dependent on the mess.
Nitesh @nitesh - 6d
Not really imo. Getting opinions of people who aren't even qualified to give opinions is useless. I'm not advocating for a Vladimir Putin, but we need a small pool of people who can make sound technical decisions and get shit done. As the price keeps going up, we get more and more people into Bitcoin and all of them want to have a say in what happens inside of core and yet 99% of these people aren't even close to being qualified to having a say or opinion. You cannot sit and wait to make everyone happy. It's just not going to happen.
I didn't say it's one person. I said a pool of people. It could be 100 people or 500. Soft forks don't need consensus of 1 million randos on twitter. It needs current and ex core devs, people who work on L2 protocols etc who we all know are qualified in making technical decisions. We have to figure out how to build a pool of qualified people, I'm only proposing how we approach core development going forward.
We already have this today in a way, only a few people have commit access to Bitcoin core repo. Have they done any harm so far? No. You're over thinking my proposal way too much. Every software project on the planet is lead by a set of people or a foundation. It's a natural thing to do, in Bitcoin's case it's still technically core devs but they have much less power in the sense that they're too scared to make any bold decision. All I'm saying is, we raise the pool of people who can be the "core" and then start enforcing better rules. All the code is public anyway, they cannot go do insane things like changing supply cap to 42m from 21m. It's all public.
It already has happened. How do you think people get commit access to Bitcoin core? You contribute long enough to gain that power. I'm sorry, I don't think Saylor or some podcastors are qualified to hinder Bitcoin's development by cutting funding from development and not letting scaling happen. Its unacceptable imo just because those assholes have a lot of money invested in Bitcoin and yell on CNBC.
