Opinion and interpretation: the differences between Jiang Zhuoer and Bitcoin Core

❖Write ahead ❖

Jiang Zhuoer published an article today "Why Core Persistently Trying to Add BTC? " This article has written a lot of things and is very professional.

TVB strives for popular interpretation, and by the way expresses its own views.

 

❖Related Interest Groups ❖

Bitcoin Core

According to the description of the official website of Bitcoin Core: "Bitcoin Core is an [open source project], which is mainly responsible for maintaining and releasing the Bitcoin client software called" Bitcoin Core. "

According to the description of Bitcoin.org: "Bitcoin Core is programmed to decide which block chain contains valid transactions. The users of Bitcoin Core only accept transactions for that block chain, making it the Bitcoin block chain that everyone else wants to use."

Translated into Chinese: The Bitcoin Core program can decide which blockchain contains valid transactions. Bitcoin Core users only accept transactions on this blockchain, which makes it a Bitcoin blockchain that everyone else wants to use.

It can be seen that Bitcoin Core is a client of Bitcoin, but not just a wallet. According to bitcoin.org "

The Bitcoin Core program can decide which blockchain contains valid transactions. "It can be seen that Bitcoin Core is the updater of the Bitcoin network code and how Bitcoin records. This program is controlled by Bitcoin Core.

 

➤ BCH (Bitcoin Cash) community

As we all know, BCH is a fork chain of BTC, and the key point of the fork is block expansion.

TVB used to think that BCH was the son of BTC. Today, after reading Jiang Zhuoer's article and studying what exactly Bitcoin Core is, TVB realized that BCH and BTC are in a competitive relationship. What is the competitive relationship, I will continue to read below.

 

➤ Blockstream

Blockstream is a blockchain technology company. Its products include Bitcoin sidechain Liquid, Bitcoin wallet Blockstream Green, Bitcoin mining equipment custody business, Blockstream satellite network, Lightning Network, open source developable sidechain blockchain platform Elements, etc.

According to the official website of Blockstream: "Liquid is a sidechain-based settlement network for traders and exchanges, enabling faster and more confidential Bitcoin transactions and digital asset issuance."

Jiang Zhuoer's point is: Blockstream is the company behind Bitcoin Core.

There is an article under the heading Bitcoin Core ≠ Blockstream. There are supporters and voices of doubt.

Bitcoin Core ≠ Blockstream from Bitcoin

TVB believes that Liquid, as Bitcoin's sidechain, inevitably has an interest relationship with the Bitcoin network and Bitcoin Core.

 

➤ Bitmain

Although Jiang Zhuoer did not mention Bitmain, Bitmain is an important force in the BCH community. I would like to add here that, because the mainland of Bitcoin is very supportive of the idea of ​​BCH capacity expansion, many people have equated Bitcoin with BCH. In addition, Liao Xiang, the founder of BTC, another fork of BTC, often attacked Bitmain and Wu Jihan for this.

BCH ≠ Bit continent.

In addition, Bitmain, as the world's largest manufacturer of crypto-asset miners, holds a relatively large portion of BTC computing power. Therefore, it is inevitable that Bitmain will have an interest relationship with the Bitcoin network and BTC.

 

❖ Differences ❖

In fact, speaking of interest, all groups are stakeholders of BTC. I drew this relationship into a picture, and I believe that anyone who sees Bitcoin Core's claim should be opposed to the issue of additional BTC.

Differences: Sustainability of the BTC Network

As we all know, BTC is the POW consensus and speaks on computing power. If you have more than 51% of the computing power, you can launch an attack on the BTC network.

The source of BTC computing power is the miners' income. Miners spend money on mining machines, which is essentially computing power. If there is no money to earn, miners will not buy computing power.

We know that the reward for miners comes from two parts: one is the newly issued BTC, and the other is the transaction fee in the block.

The problem is that after the halving this year, the reward of each block is only 6.25 BTC. Over time, the output of BTC is halved again and again, this part of the miner's reward will be less and less. Then, the miner may withdraw from mining, the computing power of the entire network is reduced, and the BTC network will be threatened by the attack.

This is a concern about the sustainability of the BTC network.

 

➤BCH Community Proposition: Expansion

Let me start with the claims of the BCH community.

To make the BTC network sustainable

→ It is necessary to increase, at least maintain, the entire network computing power of the BTC network

→ It is best to find a way to increase the income of miners

→ For each block mined, since the new BTC is decreasing, then try to increase the transaction fee in the block

→ That is to increase the transaction volume in the block, that is, expand the capacity.

Jiang Zhuoer put forward an argument: "Core locked 1M violates Satoshi Nakamoto's plan. Satoshi Nakamoto set up a block expansion plan, and even wrote code examples, so that after the new coin is mined, 'a huge chain The number of transactions (Satoshi Nakamoto) provided the commission fee to keep the miner (POW) system running. "

 

➤Bitcoin Core Proposition: Additional Issue

First, Bitcoin Core is firmly opposed to capacity expansion.

The reason is anti-audit. What is called anti-audit is to resist the audit and supervision from the government. Bitcoin Core insists on a block size of 1M, because the block capacity is small, BTC can run on more low-end devices. "In this way, the government will not kill BTC. It is the highest goal not to be killed by the government, so the block must be locked at 1M and the capacity cannot be expanded."

Secondly, due to opposition to capacity expansion, Bitcoin Core proposed to issue additional BTC, making it more than 21 million.

And their core character, Peter Todd, made two points. One is that there is no difference in inflation between 0% and 0.5%; the other is that 21 million BTC caps are a religious belief.

❖My point of view ❖

Seeing this, I believe most people will support the views of the BCH community and oppose Bitcoin Core.

Maybe some people are too lazy to decide whether to expand the capacity, but I believe that no one will support the issuance of bitcoin, and no one will accept more than 21 million bitcoins.

 

➤ Conflicts of interest behind expansion and issuance

On the surface, it is a battle for expansion. In fact, conflicts of interest.

(TVB is impartial, objectively speaking) Bitmain naturally supports this claim, because Bitmain is a mining machine producer and mining pool operator. If the profit of the miner is high, the mining machine will sell well and the mining pool profit Also higher.

Bitcoin Core feels the threat of Bitcoin's computing power, so they want to maintain a block size of 1M and hope that more terminals can participate in the Bitcoin network, and Bitcoin Core, as a Bitcoin terminal software, can have more More users.

To put it bluntly, Bitmain has an advantage in the computing power of the device, and Bitcoin Core has an advantage in the number of devices, and opposes expansion, essentially trying to maintain this advantage.

On the contrary, the BCH community, as well as Bitmain, support expansion. In addition to considering their own interests, they also consider the future development of Bitcoin. It can only be said that the expansion of BTC is in the interests of both the Bitcoin community and Bitmain.

 

➤ Expansion may be the trend

The BCH community considers not only benefits, but also the development of the BTC network.

First, Bitcoin Core's anti-audit nature is nonsense. Even if many non-mining machine terminals are participating in BTC, the government still has a way to ban BTC. Quite simply, a piece of legislation that prohibits use can discourage many people. Why Satoshi Nakamoto's motivation for creating BTC was to compete with a centralized dollar, not anti-government. There is no need to make anti-audit a paramount purpose. Therefore, insisting on small blocks with anti-audit is difficult to stand by.

Secondly, just like the BCH community's point of view, expansion can increase the number of transactions in a block. As the number of transactions increases, the fee will naturally increase, and the income of miners increases. Block rewards can also be maintained, and BTC's entire network computing power can be maintained, so the sustainability of the BTC network is also formed.

Third, TVB believes that miners' earnings are not considered first. Let's say BTC network. We know that BTC produces about 1 block every 10 minutes. If the consensus of BTC becomes stronger in the future, with more and more transaction volume within 10 minutes, the 1M block capacity is likely to become insufficient, so it is necessary to expand the capacity.

Therefore, the main driving force for BTC capacity expansion is demand. Bitcoin Core's opposition to expansion is completely unreasonable and selfish.

Added: Someone mentioned that Lightning Network solves performance problems. The relationship between the Lightning Network and the Bitcoin network is like the relationship between WeChat Pay and banks. The essence of the Lightning Network is to set up a channel with a bitcoin node as its core, and payment is performed in this channel. The payment process is no longer on the Bitcoin blockchain, so its security is Not fully guaranteed. Lightning Network is more suitable for small payments, and Lightning Network cannot replace capacity expansion.

What I don't understand is why can't we expand? Expansion does not cause any harm to Bitcoin. On the contrary, the additional issuance really violated Satoshi's original intention and changed the scarcity of Bitcoin.

 

➤ Issuance is impossible

According to Peter Todd, with an inflation rate of 0.5%, Jiang Zhuoer estimates that it will happen after 2024.

TVB believes that it is impossible to issue additional Bitcoins.

First of all, if Bitcoin Core modified the BTC program code and added BTC, this is not good news for most currency holders. Because after the issuance of BTC, its scarcity will change.

With over 21 million BTCs, no one would be happy, except for Bitcoin Core.

Therefore, even if Bitcoin Core modified the program code and added BTC, there is a high probability that it will fork. No matter which coin is called BTC after the fork. It must be that the coin with a cap of 21 million is more valuable because it is more scarce.

This logic is:

If the BTC issuance → BTC fork → the 21 million BTC is the faith

Secondly, Bitcoin Core does not intend to issue additional BTC.

Note that Bitcoin Core does not have to issue additional BTC. They are only to oppose the expansion and to maintain their monopoly on BTC.

Therefore, when the BTC price rises, even if the newly generated BTC continues to halve, the miner's revenue will not decrease, and the computing power of the entire network has not decreased, and Bitcoin Core does not need to issue additional BTC.

This logic is:

No additional issuance of BTC → BTC scarcity → BTC price increase → Miner revenue does not decrease → The entire network's computing power is maintained → No additional BTC

 

❖ Written at the end ❖

For a long time, we all think that Bitmain has a lot of Bitcoin's computing power and has formed a centralization.

This is actually quite wrong.

Because if Bitmain is centralized, BTC can be directly expanded. There will be no subsequent BCH. It is precisely because Bitcoin Core has control over the BTC program that it will fork out BCH.

The true centralization of BTC is in Bitcoin Core. Bitcoin Core is a monopoly.

There are at least four BTC mining machine manufacturers and many BTC mining pools on the market, at most they are forming oligarchs!

TVB's view is that it is likely that BTC will have to expand someday in the future. Not to meet the miners' income, but because the number of transactions on the BTC network has increased, the existing blocks cannot meet the demand. As for the additional issue, the additional issue is impossible!

So TVB and Jiang Zhuoer's point of view is the same-against Bitcoin Core.

The difference is: Jiang Zhuoer believes that BCH is a real BTC, and TVB supports-BTC that Bitcoin Core cannot control and has to expand one day. (Of course, BCH is also a good project)