Epic copy-pasta!
A Call for Consensus
Over the past few months there has been significant attention within the bitcoin ecosystem and beyond on what is commonly referred to as the “block size issue” — the size and scale of bitcoin blocks. There is a pressing need for an inclusive roadmap that takes into account the needs of businesses and all stakeholders.
As a community of bitcoin businesses, exchanges, wallets, miners, and mining pools, we have come together to chart an effective path to resolve this challenge and agreed on five positions we hope will guide the larger community as we move forward together.
The following are five key points that we have all agreed on.
1.We see the need for a modest block size increase in order to move the Bitcoin project forward, but we would like to do it with minimal risk, taking the safest and most balanced route possible. SegWit is almost ready and we support its deployment as a step in scaling.
2.We think any contentious hard-fork contains additional risks and potentially may result in two incompatible blockchain versions, if improperly implemented. To avoid potential losses for all bitcoin users, we need to minimize the risks. It is our firm belief that a contentious hard-fork right now would be extremely detrimental to the bitcoin ecosystem.
3.In the next 3 weeks, we need the Bitcoin Core developers to work with us and clarify the roadmap with respect to a future hard-fork which includes an increase of the block size. Currently we are in discussions to determine the next best steps. We are as a matter of principle against unduly rushed or controversial hard-forks irrespective of the team proposing and we will not run such code on production systems nor mine any block from that hard-fork. We urge everyone to act rationally and hold off on making any decision to run a contentious hard-fork (Classic/XT or any other).
4.We must ensure that future changes to code relating to consensus rules are done in a safe and balanced way. We also believe that hard-forks should only be activated if they have widespread consensus and long enough deployment timelines. The deployment of hard-forks without widespread consensus is dangerous and has the potential to cause trust and monetary losses.
5.We strongly encourage all bitcoin contributors to come together and resolve their differences to collaborate on the scaling roadmap. Divisions in the bitcoin community can only be mended if the developers and contributors can take the first step and cooperate with each other.
Our shared goal is the success of bitcoin. Bitcoin is strong and transformational. By working together, we will ensure that its future is bright.
Together, we are:
Phil Potter
Chief Strategy Officer
Bitfinex
Valery Vavilov
CEO
BitFury
Alex Petrov
CIO
BitFury
James Hilliard
Pool/Farm Admin
BitmainWarranty
Yoshi Goto
CEO
BitmainWarranty
Alex Shultz
CEO
BIT-X Exchange
Bobby Lee
CEO
BTCC
Samson Mow
COO
BTCC
Robin Yao
CTO
BTCT & BW
Ronny Boesing
CEO
CCEDK ApS
Obi Nwosu
Managing Director
Coinfloor
Mark Lamb
Founder
Coinfloor
Wang Chun
Admin
F2Pool
Marco Streng
CEO
Genesis Mining
Marco Krohn
CFO
Genesis Mining
Oleksandr Lutskevych
CEO
GHash.IO & CEX.IO
Lawrence Nahum
CEO
GreenAddress
Eric Larchevêque
CEO
Ledger
Jack Liao
CEO
LIGHTNINGASIC & BitExchange
Charlie Lee
Creator
Litecoin
Guy Corem
CEO
Spondoolies-Tech
Davide Barbieri
CTO
TheRockTrading
Michael Cao
CEO
Zoomhash
如果你想要读中文版，请点击这里。
This is basically the same letter the miners sent, with the same deadline! They are implying that they want Core to pick a time frame on a hard fork within three weeks or they will support Classic.
So basically it's the whole world against Core at this point. 1MB4EVA is doomed, But we still have no idea how long it will take to die. It's hard to imagine Core won't take this deal. Bigblockers have caved on everything but 2MB some time in the next say 18 months.
Core's best option will be something like SegWit this year, and if everything goes well, 2MB next year with a doubling every other year after that. They will try to figure out what the slowest scaling schedule can possibly be that the majority will accept. If they guess right, off to the races. If they guess wrong, look out below.
I've become a pessimist because I have been following this controversy longer than most. I think there is a slight probability that they will guess wrong and Classic will become Bitcoin, but that is by no means certain. Core/Blockstream has demonstrated some really stunning ineptitude with their tin ears, and weak PR. The voices against them cry louder and louder and have become a chorus, but the most powerful voice, the Market, is perhaps unclear. There is a reason why we are still trading at ~40% of the ATH 27 months later. I believe Core's obstinacy on the blocksize issue is that reason. The five year logarithmic uptrend is broken. It's Core's fault.
There is no getting rid of Core hegemony without a crash. Either a crash will get rid of them or getting rid of them will cause a crash. The only way Core can maintain Hegemony is by committing to a HF and moving from their entrenched position. Time to make popcorn.
