Bitcoin's White Paper Isn't Just Words – It's a Constitution

[rodalutor]

To some extent, this is true, since the white paper of bitcoin is the first serious document in the field of ICO and it very detailed and clearly describes all the details of the work and what difficulties can be faced in the future. All other companies took it as an example for registration of the documents therefore to some extent it can be considered if not the Bible, then the Constitution precisely.

It actually has nothing to do with ICOs. Writing white papers isn't exactly a new concept, and Bitcoin has existed for years before the first ICO was even held. Not to mention that most of ICOs' white papers are just fluff pieces riddled with error, with some of them even being plagiarized outright.

They're certainly different in that Bitcoin's white paper was written to propose a solution for a known problem, while most ICOs' white papers are simply marketing requirements.

Very few cryptos have even followed bitcoin's example. How many are actually decentralized? How many offer a real world solution and provide real value in terms of utility? Just because they also operate on a blockchain does not mean that they are following bitcoin's example, 95% of alt-coins are crap projects just made to get a big ol' slice of the proverbial pie.

[ClassyDancer]

So if the whitepaper is a constitution, it cannot be changed or amended? Is that a good thing?  Someone enlighten me please…

[xtrump101]

sad that i havent rread the whitepaper though but i agree with you, as far as my understanding since bitcoin is meant to be self regulated, that alone prove itself as institutionallt themed, and japan did implemented it as first nation for bitcoin and cryptos to be self regulated

[jseverson]

So if the whitepaper is a constitution, it cannot be changed or amended? Is that a good thing?  Someone enlighten me please…

Well constitutions can be amended, but it's not a straightforward task.

I don't see any reason why the white paper should be changed. It's okay that it's a little outdated. It's not a blueprint, and we already have road maps anyway. There's no good or bad here. The document has served its purpose is all. Some people simply put value into following it closely more than others, and that's not necessarily a good thing or a bad thing either.

[Alilamas212]

The idea of whitepaper deviates from the original decntralized space.There is a differentiating for cryptocurrencies but what will differentiate it from the FIAT?

[Gelanwan01]

I do not think there should be constitution in crypto world as it is still evolving and developing. Even though Satoshi's white paper is great but he possibly couldn't cover and think of everything.

[Kaoeveth001]

In the world of computers, a widely accepted norm is not to change anything when the system is up and running. Otherwise this leads to a system failure. A constitutional change is mandatory only when it can't address the problems beforehand. So far, I don't find any with bitcoin. People may jump up and down but it's better to sit this one out. Until bitcoin fails or is subject to an imminent fail, I don't see how the chagnes fit

[Haelitha32]

I am not in favor of chagning the white paper entirely. Perhaps over time bitcoin may need some upgradtions. Perhaps there will arise issues with scalability but at this moment I won't vote for change of any degree.