Its no secret that protocols that underpin industries can become a point of contention. This contention can manifest itself in the form of name-calling, conspiracy theories, and some plain old drama. Let’s dive into an industry known for having more protocols than we have lines of code in Bitcoin Core, the semiconductor industry.
A hotbed for protocols since the mid ’90s, creating protocols that were interoperable amongst all the players in the industry has been key to the industry’s longevity and success. This industry has been so successful with protocols, that today the technology that embeds these protocols sits in everyones pocket, something I’m sure the Bitcoin industry would not be opposed to.
History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme
It was in 2008 when Intel (a member of the USB implementers forum) took some heat for wanting to push changes to the USB standard.
Here’s what happened: Intel was perceived to be pushing a standard faster than the industry was expecting, likely due to product deadlines that they had to hit. Intel was openly accused of trying to push the spec _too fast_, although these changes were made with the consent of an industry consortium, the USB Implementers Forum. Here’s a brief summary of what happened, followed by a brief summary of what is happening in Bitcoin today.
Intel
“Recently AMD and Nvidia have accused Intel of hoarding the spec to lock customers into its chipset” Source.
“There are rumors floating about that AMD and NVIDIA are unhappy enough over the situation that they may attempt to design their own controller.”
Source.
“There has been a lot of unanswered speculation recently regarding USB 3.0 and Intel’s involvement; I thought it was about time to set the record straight.” Source.
Blockstream
“In order for sidechains to work and for Blockstream to be successful, Blockstream needs to artificially keep the Bitcoin blockchain at a low capacity” Source.
“Bitcoin XT would have begun introducing larger 8MB blocks to bitcoin users running the XT software. Others running Bitcoin Core would still process 1MB blocks, a development observers argued amounted to a split of the network.”
Source.
“Liquid has nothing to do with block size or on-chain scaling issues in general. Increasing the block size would not grant near-instant transaction functionality, only more transactions per block.” Source.
What we have been witnessing in the Bitcoin community is not new or unusual. It is simply what occurs when there is a lot at stake for individuals and corporations.
What Consortiums do well
Accelerate development when changes are necessary
With everyone’s involvement, focus on needed changes can ensure expedient implementation.
Ensure interoperability for all parties
When everyone has a say, all issues can be addressed and prepared for as a forethought rather than an after thought. The upcoming segregated witness change is great for block sizes, but perhaps it contains a bit more work for the Bitcoin wallet providers than the core developers were able to anticipate.
Marketing
Predictable changes mean upcoming protocol changes which can lead to new product offerings in product roadmaps and company strategies.
Consumer and Media
When changes are predictable and undertaken by necessary parties, industry drama does not affect investor perspectives and most importantly does not reach popular news outlets.
The Satoshi Roundtable
The Satoshi Roundtable is a step in the right direction. While previous protocol changes were planned behind closed doors or as a surprise to most of the industry, discussing protocol changes with industry thought leaders can ensure the protocol advances smoothly.
Initial Thoughts
An effective consortium can make decisions quickly and definitively. The current consortium seems to include nearly every Bitcoin company in the industry and friends, which can hinder the efficiency and effectiveness of the group. An effective consortium only contains key players. In this case a consortium of a fixed number of miners, wallets, exchanges, and periphery services would be most effective. Key metrics that determine who these parties are could be hashing power, transaction volume, or assets under management.
Building on the success of existing consortiums can save the industry a lot of times. In the past few years, we’ve had the benefit of seeing how previous consortiums coincided of with the emerging consortiums of today and how the landscape continues to evolve. Consortiums started in the mid-1990’s include the WiFi-Alliance, Bluetooth-SIG, PCI-SIG, and USB Flash Drive Alliance. Successful ones that have cropped up in the past few years include the Wireless Power Consortium and the competing, newly re-branded Airfuel Alliance, and the recently formed IOT consortium, the Open Connectivity Foundation.
The Satoshi Roundtable helps our industry take a step in the right direction when it comes to protocol improvements and changes. It will help to prevent some of the heated rhetoric that has been permeating through news and media outlets and help us all move in the same direction. Let’s move forward, cautiously, predictably, towards exponentially increasing transaction volumes.
