Topic: Former Governor of the Bank of England discusses Bitcoin in his new book (Read 402 times)

That is some high quality confirmation bias going on there!  That he said it was 'akin to digital gold' does not mean that he has any opinion on the block size!  I would assume that he has no idea that there is a block size limit, what it is, or what the consequences are of it being raised/not being raised.

Good work though!

dunno about the Vitalik quote but it just seems to me that bitcoin has reached the point of no return and simply is what it is.

In other words, I believe that consensus will never be reached on increasing the block size limit.  AND THAT'S OK.

In fact, its better than OK.   Because it demonstrates that the rules of the game cannot be changed mid flight.   At least not for anything contoversial.   If controversial changes could be made then it undermines trust in all cryptocurrency.   Today block-size increase, tomorrow 21 mil increase, etc.

The consensus layer is just that.  An agreement by everyone that's opted in to using bitcoin to date.  Good luck getting all those people to agree on anything controversial.

So what to do about scaling?   The first step is to admit to ourselves that bitcoin is what it is.

Say it.  Bitcoin is what it is.   The most we can do are non controversial soft-forks. 

Given that, it leaves us with things like segwit, side-chains, lightning.

It also leaves us with alt-coins.  Perhaps other coins have or will be devised with properties that inherently scale better than bitcoin.  And/or that have fundamentally better privacy guarantees and decentralization incentives.  If so, the market can dynamically shift to those over time.   Very likely such coins would peg themselves to bitcoin anyway.  Thereby lifting bitcoin's value should the altcoin have a mass-market breakthrough.

The time for major innovation in consensus critical areas is before launching a coin.  not after.   So it is important to get it right from the start.

Bitcoin is what it is.   accept it.

In The End of Alchemy Mervyn King dedicates two pages to discussing the virtual currency. He seems to have a pretty good grasp on the topic too. He also mentions Auroracoin (and Scotcoin in the footnotes) as examples of two scamcoins.

Interestingly he takes an implied stance on the blocksize debate, saying that bitcoin is "more akin to a form of digital gold - appealing to those who distrust governments to control the supply of money but highly volatile in value". Wasn't it Vitalik Buterin who said that if users wanted digital gold they should keep the current blocksize limit in place?