That was a great interview. A lot of good point have been made. Worth watching.
I was happy to hear Gavin say that he wants to "get to the point where there will be multiple robust implementations of the core protocol." Based on the opposition I've received here to similar ideas I've proposed, I thought that perhaps I was missing something. I'm more confident now that I'm not. We need to decentralize development.
This gave me a new talking point: "Let's kill Bitcoin Core and allow the green shoots of a garden of new implementations to grow from its fertile ashes"
More info on the idea: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-September/010802.html
Yup bitcoin core is dead. Many newbies here still can't grasp this simple concept.
Forking is by design feature of bitcoin. Bitcoin core is nothing but an implementation of the protocol. It is NOT the protocol itself.
How is it "dead"? Who's taken its place?
Nothing is dead. What is slowly dying, however, is the idea that the implementation called "Core" is somehow core to Bitcoin.
Core is locked-up; Wladimir won't integrate changes without Core Dev consensus. With all the arguing, I think there's now too much bad blood around Core. Why not let it go? Let's not reach consensus with Bitcoin Core. This will then provide impetus for new implementations to fork from Core (like XT did) and implement whatever scaling solution they deem best. The users will then select the winning solution simply based on the code they choose to run. The other implementations will then rush to make compatible changes in order to keep their dwindling user bases.
This is the decentralized spirit of Bitcoin in action. Creative destruction. Consensus formed simply by the code we run.
