Are you for or against the ossification of the Bitcoin protocol?
FOR ossification38.3%
AGAINT ossification61.7%
47 votes \ poll ended
599 sats \ 1 reply \ @BITC0IN 1 Jun
slow and steady
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @jakoyoh629 1 Jun
... win the race
reply
359 sats \ 0 replies \ @beorange 1 Jun
Careful and thoughtful evolution. Everything must evolve to meet the needs of the users. But Bitcoin is critical, so all proposed changes should be met with rigorous scrutiny and evaluation.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Hamstr 1 Jun freebie
I'm not sure if you're using the right word to describe your question in your poll. As I voted in line with the 3rd definition. And had to think about this 3x before I voted.
https://m.stacker.news/33502
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @itsrealfake 1 Jun
I'm for more Node operators and whatever they end up deciding
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Athena 1 Jun
Idk, I'm kinda new in bitcoin. But the ossification of it requires some changes to satoshi's paper, I'm against it.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @OT 1 Jun
Add the stuff that makes lightning better, a covenant that creates something like op_vault and I think we’re done for a while
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @zx 1 Jun
I'm 38.2% for ossification and 61.8% against it.
But I expect that to reverse in the next decade.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatsMate 1 Jun
I'm against ossification, but would like it to continue to improve slowly on base level but frequently on higher levels.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Sirkay 1 Jun
More options, for now, gradually observing and slowly taking steps
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @jgbtc 1 Jun
It doesn't matter if people are for or against it. It will become increasingly difficult to change as time goes on regardless, because consensus is needed.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @stefano 1 Jun
Ossification is a sign of death. Bitcoin is alive, it will be reinforced by the plebs for the plebs...
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Manikese 1 Jun
I think the best option is having it very difficult to change. It should be like amending the Constitution of the United States. Difficult, not impossible. that may be how it is now.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @kilianbuhn 1 Jun
Why are people suddenly so obsessed with this specific concept? Who brought the topic up such that it's now on everybodys mind?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @pakovm 1 Jun
Saylor.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ca OP 1 Jun
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @grayruby 1 Jun
You need more options than totally black and white choices.
You can’t be completely for ossification. Need to fix the block numbers bug at some point.
reply
20 sats \ 1 reply \ @ca OP 1 Jun
What's the block number bug?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @grayruby 1 Jun
https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2020/08/07/fixing-this-bitcoin-killing-bug-will-eventually-require-a-hard-fork/amp/
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @dollarparity 1 Jun
That's too general.
reply
4 sats \ 0 replies \ @kilianbuhn 1 Jun
if that's too general, give us the more specific categories where you would decide differently
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @030a29f333 1 Jun
Ossification is a fantasy idea
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @rewolf 1 Jun
Assuming “ossification” to mean a complete stop on changes to the protocol ever. If not, then you ought define it for the poll
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @ca OP 1 Jun
Complete stop on changes to the protocol ever 👍
reply
23 sats \ 0 replies \ @freetx 1 Jun
I'm not sure this definition represents ossification supporters? Can anyone point to well-known core devs that express this?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @pakovm 1 Jun freebie
Ossification is a stupid idea. I get that you guys are fearful because you think that Bitcoin is too fragile to be changed (while preaching that it's antifragile), but it isn't, also Bitcoin will never scale if it doesn't change.
The argument could be about how fast changes should be implemented, but never changing anything at all? That's a stupid idea that could only make Bitcoin fade into irrelevance.