Last week, I co-hosted a @bitcoinmagazine clubhouse on #Bitcoin’s coming #Taproot activation.

Yes, there are differences in opinion. No, this does not resemble debates that have led to past network splits.

A quick thread on current consensus 🧵
2/ First, the context around #Taproot is very different than the debates that resulted in the #BCH blockchain split.

Nearly everyone agrees Taproot is beneficial for #Bitcoin, and there are (so far) no groups with meaningful objections to the proposal.…
3/ The disagreement is about aligning activation (in code) with project ethos

There are two proposed ways to activate:

LOT = FALSE: Gives miners a year to activate Taproot, then it expires.

LOT = TRUE: Lets users activate Taproot if miners do not upgrade within a year.
4/ Bitcoin developers appear to favor LOT = FALSE.

If after 1 year miners do not upgrade, LOT = FALSE will cause #Taproot activation to fail.

Developers see a "miner-activated soft fork" (MASF) as the safe option and note Taproot can always be proposed for activation again.
5/ Users who backed 2017’s user-activated soft fork (UASF) appear to support LOT = TRUE

If after 1 year miners do not upgrade to #Taproot, LOT = TRUE will enact the change.

Users see a UASF as a way to “block a miner veto” over uncontroversial changes ready to be merged.
6/ This appears to be a principled disagreement.

#UASF advocates understand why developers would not want to add LOT=TRUE (thereby advocating for a change).

Developers understand users want LOT = TRUE, but don’t want to be “decision-makers” or to push unsafe code.
7/ A LOT=TRUE version of the software is being coded by developers outside of Core.

It is suggested this could be vetted by Core developers independently, as was prior UASF code.

This is seen as users exercising a check on miners by deciding to run software.
8/ Most agree the situation could get a lot more contentious if miners delayed #Taproot.

Miners are seen as having delayed 2017’s #SegWit upgrade.

Over 80% of miners say they support the #Taproot upgrade:
9/ Bitcoin is a rough consensus system, and opinions on Taproot activation could shift.

Some developers are opposed to LOT = TRUE and may support no option if proposed.

Some users oppose LOT = FALSE and see UASFs (not MASFs) as better aligned with Bitcoin's values
10/ There are some “worst-case scenarios” where a chain split could occur.

If a significant part of the economic network was divided over the proposals, blockchain re-orgs are also possible.

Concern about these outcomes is low at the moment.
11/ Note: This is just one person’s impression of a single group conversation.

If you want to get educated on #Bitcoin’s next upgrade, read @AaronvanW's latest article via @BitcoinMagazine.…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Pete Rizzo

Pete Rizzo Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @pete_rizzo_

19 Jan
✨ Today, I started my 8TH YEAR working full-time in #Bitcoin.

I've been a journalist, I've worked at a global exchange and I've spent thousands of hours down the rabbit hole.

If you're just starting out, here are the lessons I'd pass along 🧵
1/ 𝔹𝕚𝕥𝕔𝕠𝕚𝕟 𝕚𝕤 𝕒 𝕗𝕣𝕖𝕖 𝕠𝕡𝕖𝕟-𝕤𝕠𝕦𝕣𝕔𝕖 𝕤𝕠𝕗𝕥𝕨𝕒𝕣𝕖 𝕡𝕣𝕠𝕛𝕖𝕔𝕥

It is an innovation that comes from a long lineage of other computer software projects.

Most other cryptocurrencies are selling claims to future innovations.
2/ 𝔹𝕚𝕥𝕔𝕠𝕚𝕟 𝕒𝕟𝕕 𝕔𝕣𝕪𝕡𝕥𝕠 𝕒𝕣𝕖𝕟'𝕥 𝕥𝕙𝕖 𝕤𝕒𝕞𝕖

Bitcoin is a global money solving for monetary policy manipulation.

Crypto is the idea there should be many monies competing on features.

These visions may or may not be complementary.
Read 11 tweets
19 Dec 20
⚡ 10 years ago today, the #Bitcoin GitHub first went online.

A decade later, the developers powering this new global money continue to set new highs 🧵
2/ #Bitcoin is not a stock or a bond. It’s digital money powered by open-source software.

In 2010, only a few volunteered to write and review its code. Today, there have been over 1,500+ unique contributors.
3/ Review is essential to keeping #Bitcoin's code up and running.

In 2010, pull requests (suggested changes to the software) were lucky to get a few last-minute reviews.

In the decade since, the number of reviews each pull request receives has steadily increased.
Read 7 tweets
10 Dec 20
Virtual currency. (2010) ⚡ Threat to the dollar. (2020)

A how-it-started salute thread to the first #Bitcoin news article on its 10th anniversary.

2/ The first MSM article on #Bitcoin appeared in @pcworld on December 10, 2010.

A few articles before it referenced BTC (in brief or in passing), but this article had a new narrative: Bitcoin for censorship-resistant payments.
3/ @wikileaks had been de-platformed by PayPal and the author was out to explore how #Bitcoin, an upstart digital money might come to its aid.

How about an entire currency based on peer-to-peer technology?
Read 12 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!