I wonder if part of the problem is that he starts the post with the phrase "leadership problem". I just glided past that and read the rest, and I saw it as a framing of "we really may no longer be in a position to do this kind of thing". Whereas if you read his whole post as about a leadership problem, then anyone directly involved in Core dev could very reasonably take it as saying the kind of thing you mention here, and I have to entirely agree that that is between unhelpful and also really, really bad. Like I said to Matt, could be a perspective thing; and seeing some of the more heated exchanges going on over there, well, I can see that this is not super-productive ...
It's nice that you bring an outside, detached perspective. I'll ponder this a bit more.
One thing that was absent in the article are the crypto tricks some people are researching again with batching, aggregation, entroot, etc. As far as I can tell that is pretty much only pushed forward by core-adjacent people at the moment. The consensus cleanup is also making some progress.
i definitely agree with the part that making consensus changes has become more difficult !
i just think the framing as a bitcoin core leadership issue is way too simplistic, and i hate how he waves away all the current work done on the node software because it's not consensus changes, that's also typical 2014 playbook
sorry if i overreacted, if...anything this reminds me that i shouldn't ever get involved in this stuff again and stick to code reviews 🙂
Oddbean new post about login | logout