> There were many developers quite interested in larger block size for many years
Yet, they weren't around when it came time to make it happen.
> Segwit2x had over 90% of the hashpower of the bitcoin world voting for it
Yet, it had a deeply flawed software development process.
> it is still the best measure of consensus and support the network has
Yet the miners stated that they would only mine the fork for 12 hours, do you know why? Because they would have been mining at a (relative) loss. Really undermines this measure of consensus. Maybe the best measure is the market price of the coin.
> I think that the survival and modest success of Bitcoin Cash eroded the initial overwhelming support for Segwit2X.
Basically, Bitcoin Cash is what Segwit2x should've been: an honest, replay-protected coin for people who think a money's value comes from its base layer payment system's transactions per second.
That seems to imply that there are no grey or black markets for currencies. This is contrary to what has been observed in history and in some countries today.
Wow! This is interesting. I thought the "WMDs in Iraq" was fake news, turns out the "no WMDs in Iraq" is fake news! So much fake news, hard to sort everything out.
Thank you for the educational write up! Bitcoin literacy is sorely lacking among journalists, and yet they often forget to contact experts such as yourself...
I could not disagree more. We should adapt to climate change as it happens.
Besides, all of the resources we pour into forcing the climate to not change (which would be unprecedented!) are all for naught when that asteroid hits.
That's a trade-off. Is the cost of learning and context switching between languages/frameworks less than the benefit of using a tool that is X% more appropriate?
Article you linked to is about passive investing in commodities pushing commodities prices up. I agree this is a negative externality. But we're discussing passive investing in equities pushing equities prices up, which have positive externalities in the economy. This is good.
They weren't outsourcing software development work, they were outsourcing the manual task of checking PDFs against XLS files. The quality wasn't the problem, the throughput and cost are. I wrote an app that parsed the PDFs but no manager wanted to learn Python to review the code, so they told me to move on :(
When I worked at Deloitte they made a similar decision to outsource to India instead of training staff to learn Python and automate the time consuming, low value work. That's when I decided to leave, best move of my career.
Yet, they weren't around when it came time to make it happen.
> Segwit2x had over 90% of the hashpower of the bitcoin world voting for it
Yet, it had a deeply flawed software development process.
> it is still the best measure of consensus and support the network has
Yet the miners stated that they would only mine the fork for 12 hours, do you know why? Because they would have been mining at a (relative) loss. Really undermines this measure of consensus. Maybe the best measure is the market price of the coin.
> I think that the survival and modest success of Bitcoin Cash eroded the initial overwhelming support for Segwit2X.
Basically, Bitcoin Cash is what Segwit2x should've been: an honest, replay-protected coin for people who think a money's value comes from its base layer payment system's transactions per second.