Ossification is a phrase thrown round very ceaselessly in Bitcoin. “The protocol will ossify.” “Ossification is nice.” “Bitcoin does not want to vary, ossify it now.” Bitcoiners are a skeptical group of individuals, and as such they’re naturally skeptical about change. There’s an excellent motive for that: the blocksize conflict was successfully a mix of sure builders (fortunately gone now) and influential figures trying to strong-arm and coerce folks into adopting damaging change by means of threats and misinformation. After such a big assault as that, it is solely pure to view each proposed change as some barely better-disguised and refined mechanism that may very well be used to undermine the system as an entire.
In principle, Bitcoin is one thing that may be upgraded and adjusted endlessly; so long as the supermajority of contributors select to enact a change, and all voluntarily undertake and implement that change, then Bitcoin can incorporate it. On the finish of the day Bitcoin is only a protocol and software program used to implement and work together with that protocol. Any arbitrary change will be made to the protocol so long as individuals are keen to undertake and implement it.
The catch there’s that may folks all get on board with a change? If historical past reveals us something, the default reply is not any, not with no very convincing case for a value-add and one which doesn’t create any new externalities or negatives.
So what does this imply?
Ossification Is not Tradition, It is Incentives
Ossification is ceaselessly mentioned as a cultural phenomenon; i.e., “Bitcoin should have a tradition of ossification!” I feel this utterly misses what the unique dialogue round protocol ossification identified when it comes to social dynamics. The dialogue round ossification had nothing to do with folks deliberately constructing a tradition of “no change,” or deciding consciously “Bitcoin is nice sufficient!” — it was in regards to the primary incentives round system progress. The extra contributors there are, the extra folks there are with much less understanding of the trade-offs of potential modifications. When somebody enters this area they begin studying about Bitcoin as it’s now and the trade-offs of issues as they’re now. To take their understanding past that, to investigate the trade-offs of how issues may very well be, takes time.
Add to that very clear historic examples of individuals having tried to push by means of modifications that will have been very detrimental to the system, and the pure tendency in an setting of progress is for modifications to asymptotically method being not possible. Why? Not due to some tradition that claims “change is dangerous!” As a result of the pure incentive if one thing is working correctly to take care of or develop your wealth is to not mess with it until it stops doing that efficiently.
Individuals are not going to get on board with change till they’re assured that the change underneath dialogue is a web optimistic to their financial worth. That is not tradition, or “Bitcoin maximalism,” that’s simply pure unadulterated financial incentives.
The Rock And The Laborious Place
Bitcoin will naturally ossify ultimately; if it doesn’t then your complete system has someway wound up being influenced or managed by a central group of people who find themselves capable of push by means of modifications with none hesitance or skepticism from the broader consumer base. If that’s the way forward for Bitcoin, then I’d personally take into account your complete system a failure.
So ultimately, if it doesn’t fail, Bitcoin will stop to be one thing that may be essentially upgraded on a protocol degree. There will likely be a degree the place consensus guidelines don’t change anymore, and everybody has to accept what Bitcoin is at that present time. What’s the issue with this?
Proper now, Bitcoin doesn’t scale. If we wind up discovering that Bitcoin is ossified as it’s proper now the subsequent time we try a tender fork, then it doesn’t scale to even a small fraction of the planet if everybody tries to make use of it in a self-custodial approach. So if Bitcoin ossified at the moment, your complete dream of a cash that everybody can self-custody and be free from the chance of third events successfully is lifeless for most individuals on this planet.
Bitcoin will ultimately cease altering, but when it hits that time too early then there are large downsides. A Bitcoin the place solely 5% of the world can probably self-custody may nonetheless enact huge change to the world by being a impartial platform opening up competitors for custodial providers, however it isn’t the true revolution of sovereignty that many Bitcoiners are right here for. It is one factor if many individuals consciously select to not self-custody; it’s totally one other if most individuals aren’t even provided that alternative.
Threading The Needle
Modifications to Bitcoin ought to undoubtedly be approached with warning and conservatism, however this must be balanced with the dynamic of approaching ossification. Bitcoin has many shortcomings, particularly with regard to scalability, and these shortcomings must be addressed as a lot as doable in a secure approach earlier than it reaches the purpose of ossifying. Dialogue and training round proposed modifications is crucial and important side when pushing for an enchancment of change to the protocol; with out even a primary understanding of how a proposed change works and what it does, it’s the pure response for folks to reject that change. If the system capabilities, and secures their worth correctly, there is no such thing as a motive for any rational actor to assist the change with out perceived advantages to their financial worth that outweigh any perceived detrimental results.
This presents each challenges and assault vectors to the consensus-building course of. It’s mandatory to tell customers earlier than any probability of enacting a change can happen, however this presents the chance for malicious actors to spend their time misinforming customers as a way to forestall a optimistic change or create assist for a detrimental one.
Bitcoiners have to string the needle of being cautious and conservative with regards to modifications proposed to the protocol, however on the similar time we’re going to have to vary Bitcoin as a way to tackle its scalability shortcomings. The one different various is to simply accept them and shut the door on a Bitcoin protocol that may truly provide the power to custody their very own cash to everybody. Sooner or later it is going to cease altering, and at that time there will likely be a bar set on how many individuals are able to interacting with the system natively and sovereignly. We must always not rush to set that bar prematurely.
If Bitcoin is to succeed, in my view it is going to ultimately ossify, and if that doesn’t occur I’d personally take into account Bitcoin a failed experiment. However we must be seeking to make the system as scalable as doable with out damaging or destroying the basic properties that make it priceless within the first place. The clock is ticking; that does not imply we must always rush into reckless motion with out warning and cautious thought, however the clock continues to be ticking.
It is a visitor put up by Shinobi. Opinions expressed are totally their very own and don’t essentially replicate these of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Journal.
