BITCOIN Share on Articles | Bitcoin Satoshi Vision | Bitcon Bitcoin Satoshi...
BITCOIN Share on Articles | Bitcoin Satoshi Vision | Bitcon Bitcoin Satoshi...
The “civil war” in Bitcoin refers to a contentious debate within the Bitcoin community about how best to scale the network to accommodate more transactions. The debate centers around the issue of block size – that is, how large each block in the blockchain should be.
A group of developers advocated raising the block size cap from 1 MB to 2 MB in 2015 in an effort to boost the network’s speed and effectiveness. A sizeable segment of the community backed this idea, known as Bitcoin Classic.
Another team of programmers countered this claim by stating that increasing block size would result in centralization and make it more challenging for independent users to operate nodes on the network. Segregated Witness (SegWit), a different approach they suggested, would isolate transaction signatures from the rest of the transaction data and effectively increase each block’s capacity without increasing its size.
The argument between these two sides heated up as one side charged the other with endorsing a poor and risky option. When the community was threatened with a “hard fork” in 2017, which would have caused the blockchain to divide into two distinct cryptocurrencies, the situation boiled over.
Ultimately, the community decided to implement SegWit, which was seen as a more elegant and sustainable solution to the scaling problem. However, the debate highlighted the challenges of reaching consensus in a decentralized network and raised questions about the future of Bitcoin governance.
The article from coingeek.com discusses the “civil war” that took place within the Bitcoin community during the period from 2017-2018, which was primarily driven by disagreements over the best way to scale the Bitcoin network.
https://coingeek.com/the-war-on-bitcoin/
At the heart of this disagreement was a debate over the optimal block size for the Bitcoin blockchain. On one side of the debate were those who believed that the block size should be increased in order to accommodate more transactions and improve scalability. On the other side were those who believed that keeping the block size small was essential for maintaining the decentralized nature of the network and preventing centralization.
This debate eventually led to the creation of two separate Bitcoin networks: Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Cash. Bitcoin Core followed the original Bitcoin protocol and retained the small block size, while Bitcoin Cash increased the block size to 8 MB in an effort to improve scalability.
In the case of Bitcoin Cash, the hard fork was driven primarily by disagreements over the block size limit. Supporters of Bitcoin Cash believed that the 1 MB block size limit imposed by Bitcoin was too restrictive and hindered the growth and adoption of the cryptocurrency. They proposed increasing the block size limit to 8 MB in order to increase the capacity of the network and improve transaction speed.
Bitcoin SV, on the other hand, was created in 2018 as a result of a dispute between two factions within the Bitcoin Cash community. The conflict centered around a proposed change to the Bitcoin Cash protocol known as the “Satoshi Vision” or “SV” protocol. Supporters of the SV protocol believed that it would improve the stability and scalability of the network, while opponents saw it as a power grab by a small group of developers.
When people think about Bitcoin, they often picture a single unstoppable cryptocurrency...
Bitcoin has been called many things: digital gold, a revolutionary currency, and...
When people hear about Bitcoin today, they often think of soaring prices,...
When Bitcoin was first introduced in 2009, it was a mystery wrapped...