[2023-02-16] WSJ: Bitcoin’s Future Depends on a Handful of Mysterious Coders

[chmod755]

Developers with power to change the cryptocurrency’s software hold an unorthodox role, are elusive—and have been known to head off disaster for the coin

Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoin-core-maintainers-crypto-7b93804

What are your thoughts about a handful of developers controlling the code of Bitcoin Core? Does that make Bitcoin centralized in a way?*

*Sure anyone can make their own code, but it requires a lot of knowledge and it must be in consensus.

[stompix]

What are your thoughts about a handful of developers controlling the code of Bitcoin Core? Does that make Bitcoin centralized in a way?*

It makes the development of Bitcoin somewhat centralized as even with just a bunch of guys taking care of that it's still not one single factor of decision, but that doesn't change the nature of Bitcoin at all. Cassandra is a distributed database, it was developed by Facebook, but it's still a decentralized database, the BitTorrent protocol was developed by Bram Cohen alone, the BitTorrent software has gone closed source but that doesn't make the protocol centralized in any way.
How would completely decentralized development look like, with everyone free to create his own version of...oh wait!

[DooMAD]

It's pretty simple.  With influence, comes responsibility.  If people can see that developers are acting responsibly, they'll continue to use the code. 

Bitcoin Core is essentially a product.  One that you don't have to buy, but a product nonetheless.  There is potential for competition, as anyone is free to take that code, modify it in any way they see fit and then publish that new code for others to use.  But it remains to be seen whether anyone else could create a rival product while still exhibiting the same standard of peer-review and diligence.  Smaller dev teams would likely lack the manpower to produce the save level of work, so it makes sense to coordinate efforts in one large dev team.  It's impossible to deny there's a natural incentive to cooperate, rather than try to compete.

Decentralisation is a valid goal in many scenarios, but I'm not convinced software development is one of them.

[Carlton Banks]

Developers with power to change the cryptocurrency’s software hold an unorthodox role

that's a weird way to put it.

their position can loose it's importance very very easily, it's not like being some chairman role in the financial system, i.e. it's meritocratic

, are elusive—and have been known to head off disaster for the coin[/b]

the elusive people.

WHO GRANTED YOU AN INTERVIEW?

these WSJ people are pure assholes for this game playing behavior.

what pos wrote this pos article? do we have a name?

Does that make Bitcoin centralized in a way?*

*Sure anyone can make their own code

right, that's obvious

, but it requires a lot of knowledge

...yes....

and it must be in consensus.

....no

why would any devs need to follow any consensus? we've already had several breaks and changes in consensus, both in Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. there is no mandate to follow anything or anyone.

people follow what makes sense to them, devs and users alike. there would be no forkcoins or altcoins if that were true, hence it's self-evidently false

[chmod755]

and it must be in consensus.

....no

why would any devs need to follow any consensus?

I mean: if you try to program your own Bitcoin node you have to implement the consensus rules of Bitcoin Core or you're not using Bitcoin. You still need to follow code rules set by those developers unless your implementation becomes the new standard version.