In a recent thread on this humble forum, crypto billygoat Greg Maxwell (/u/nullc) graced us with his presence to question the wrecklessness of the ABC development team for implementing Schnorr signatures via hard fork.
Why is is that it's not OK to take some technical risk to make simple, straightforward engineering choices such as increasing the block size limit, but it is OK to waltz into a dervish of schedule, cost, AND technical risk to force an unproven, overengineered second layer onto the user base?
Has anyone working for Core/Blockstream every actually spent any time outside of academia? Have any of them ever been beholden to deadlines, budgets, contracts, or end users NOT LOSING FUNDS?
[link] [comments]
source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/b36ij6/can_someone_please_help_me_understand_the/
No comments:
Post a Comment