After months of heated debate over whether the Bitcoin network should scale or not, there seems to be no consensus in sight. The community is at a crossroads with two differing opinions on forking the network from 1MB to 20MB. Yet, getting most of the validating nodes, miners and the rest of the bionetwork on board in an appropriate manner is a very significant issue. One camp thinks that the current network with its mere 7 transactions per second is debilitating and uncompetitive. However, the other camp believes that promoting a hard fork will revert transactions, which is the opposite of the basic principles of the Blockchain technology and its immutable ledger. Roger Ver: Split of ETH was a good thing Coin Telegraph spoke to Roger Ver, CEO of Bitcoin.com, on whether Bitcoin should scale or not at this crucial moment in its march to become a global digital currency of choice. Asked whether scalability will lead to a split in the Bitcoin community as already has happened with Ethereum, Roger had this to say: “The market clearly stated that the split of ETH into two forks was a good thing as shown by the increased market cap after the split. I think letting the two camps with incompatible visions for Bitcoin go their own way will also be a good thing.” Coin Telegraph: Why is Bitcoin hard forking a necessary step? Roger Ver : Any time two camps have incompatible views they should go their separate way. CT: What accounts for the animosity towards hard forking? RV : I think 99% of the animosity in the Bitcoin ecosystem is a direct result of Theymos’ policies of not allowing dissenting opinions on the main Bitcoin discussion platforms that he controls. The fact that the side benefiting from the suppression […]
