Bitcoin's great weakness is that it is software, and software can be changed, thereby corrupting the original idea.
Consensus mitigates this, but when you only have one reference client, there is no consensus.
Login to reply
Replies (9)
Do you think we're at a stage where the 21M cap could be removed by Core?
Are we back to the bcash talking points?
No wonder itvis silently breaking out of its 8 year downtrend against fully compromisef BTC core v30.
Anyone can do anything in a fork of bitcoin. Additionally, if they change that part of consensus code, you can just run older software clients.
Consensus is by definition a single set of rules. The number of “reference clients” doesn’t matter because every one has to implement the same rules by definition
That's the direction core is being steered towards. This is Peter Todd's game plan, nudge core closer with each "improvement" until he gets his demurrage. Notice how with v30 core is starting to look a lot like his libre fork.


I'm aware of this "proposal" by Peter Todd. Who would actually agree with it?
I'm pretty sure enabling a change like this would end the Bitcoin project, and if Bitcoin cannot work unless there's a perpetual emission of new coins to keep miners afloat then the whole experiment was good, but ultimately a failure.
Code needs to be frozen and locked or #Bitcoin is doomed. Adoption has stalled out. Unless this gets fixed Bitcoin is done.
I agree that at this time, trying to make this change would be met with strong resistance. This is his long term plan, many little changes still to come before he drops his demurrage BIP. Unfortunately I think Todd will have plenty of support when the time comes. Look at all the sheep who support spam today.
Millions of nodes actively protecting the idea would have helped. But there aren’t enough nodes. People didn’t grasp the importance of fixing the money…