Regarding the Bitcoin "scaling" event, a financial practitioner's opinion

I am a financial practitioner, CIIA, currently working in a hedge fund, and I am also a programmer. I started to get in touch with Bitcoin in 2013. After understanding its concept and cryptographic logic, I became a Bitcoin supporter and a full-node operator. Most of the time, I am just a silent follower and holder of Bitcoin, occasionally paying attention to the dynamics of some projects, and I don’t know much about the Bitcoin core development circle. Of course, I also pay attention to the issue of Bitcoin expansion. The recent debate makes me a little worried, which seems to deviate from the core values ​​of Bitcoin.

Among the many values ​​of Bitcoin, one is "depoliticization". The so-called politics currently has two forms: one is dictatorship, and the other is democracy. For example, the former is that the decision of Bitcoin is made by one or two people or one company. This will not happen in Bitcoin at present, and the community will not allow this to happen in the future. The latter seems to be a good state, but there is no 100% democracy in the real world. There is more or less "public opinion kidnapping" in it. I think the current debate on Bitcoin's expansion is in this state, and there is the possibility of public opinion kidnapping . Bitcoin should be depoliticized, and the form of democracy where the minority obeys the majority should not appear in Bitcoin. "Democracy" itself is a kind of politics. The reasons are as follows:

1. Most of the real Bitcoin user group currently have no opportunity to participate in Bitcoin decision-making, and they will determine the future of Bitcoin (core developers have made outstanding contributions to Bitcoin, but they cannot determine the future of Bitcoin. This is a reality that code contributors must face).

2. Great creations should not be determined by politics (such as democracy where the minority obeys the majority). Many inventions and creations are supported by only a few people in the early stages, and there may be splits during the development process, but it is not necessarily the branch with the most support that will succeed. When it comes to Bitcoin, we don’t want to destroy its potential because of “democracy”.

Therefore, it is inappropriate for Bitcoin Classic to use voting methods and mining pool support as reasons, and it is also inappropriate for Bitcoin Core to say that other branches are altcoins. But there is always a better way to solve the problem.

Since Bitcoin is depoliticized, the problems of Bitcoin should be solved by the economy itself. After all, the "currency" attribute is innate to it. This is what I, a financial worker, want to say most today. Why do I love Bitcoin? Because my motto is " If a problem can be solved by mathematics, don't use people to solve it ", and Bitcoin is so consistent. Why do I love finance? Because " If a problem can be solved by economics, don't use people to solve it ", so the stock market can promote the effective allocation of funds and allow the greatest companies to grow and develop.

So why can’t Bitcoin be solved by economic means? Yes, by economic means, not by people voting and arguing.

Therefore, all core participants, can you accept a small invitation, calm down, put aside the discussion of expansion methods, and reach a consensus on the " Bitcoin expansion principles " first, because principled things (or methodologies) are easier to reach consensus on and have long-term guiding significance. For example, the principled definitions of "Turing completeness" and "artificial intelligence" are good examples. With such a principled consensus, everyone can contribute their own strength under this principle and not stifle all possibilities. This is a great blessing for Bitcoin!

For example, is it possible to reach a consensus like this:

1. Bitcoin Core will never perform a hard fork except to fix harmful bugs (to maintain the stability of the infrastructure);

2. Various innovative teams can build their own Bitcoin forks, but they must use the method of joint mining with Bitcoin Core (this will not confuse miners and will not disperse computing power);

3. Non-mandatory. (It is not mandatory, but it will guide community decision-making.)

In this way, any Bitcoin branch will have a market value in the trading market, and everyone can choose at any time without rushing to make a decision, and the market value is the best hint of your choice. In this way, the scalability problem of Bitcoin is solved with economic problems.

For example, we can reach a consensus like this:

1. Any hard fork does not solve a specific problem, but enhances the ability of the soft fork to solve the problem (so that the hard fork does not actually make any changes to the features in the early stage, making it easier to reach a consensus);

2. Any specific feature modification is carried out through soft forks (so that there will be a sufficient selection process, and there will still be only one main chain after consensus is reached).

I do not support the Bitcoin Core solution, nor the Bitcoin Classic solution. This is the right attitude from a financial perspective, because it is difficult for me to judge now, but I can always support which branch by trading and holding coins. But if it is a hard fork, miners and applications based on the Bitcoin blockchain must make a choice, which is the biggest harm.

Finally, no matter what happens to Bitcoin, it is actually a good thing. What will happen if the 1M block capacity is not expanded, transactions are crowded and transaction fees are increased? What will happen if a hard fork occurs and there are two "Bitcoin" blockchains? This is what Bitcoin must face, but in the end I believe that the market will make its own choices and the Bitcoin ecosystem can adapt to any situation. The remarks made by a few people that "if such and such a situation happens, Bitcoin will face such and such a disaster" are just groundless worries. If these things can destroy Bitcoin, Bitcoin would not exist long ago. Everything that happens is a test and growth for Bitcoin, and we look forward to its growth. I hope Bitcoin can solve problems with mathematics and economics .

Welcome to further communicate via Email: fviews#qq.com, WeChat FViews.

We welcome people to translate this article into English, and we hope that the administrators of this site can forward it to participating developers and more organizations.

Author: He Fangwei, founder of Hedgehog Hedge Fund, quantitative trader, and Bitcoin enthusiast.