Unable to load page
5 stars based on
57 reviews
This, as you might expect, limits the number of transactions that can be verified per block there is a new block created about every ten minutes or so. That is why there are a seemingly endless number of Linux distributions with names like Mint, Debian, and Ubuntu. It is this quality that makes this current dispute so charged: In short, the outcome is zero sum: In this the debate bitcoin academic articles on diversity Bitcoin mirrors what it is that makes Bitcoin and the blockchain technology on which it is based so interesting: And, when it comes to adding to the blockchain, only one block will win.
There are other parallels between Bitcoin broadly and this debate in particular. For example, while everyone agrees that the idea of the blockchain is brilliant and a real breakthrough in computer science digital scarcity was thought to be impossiblethere is a lot of disagreement about exactly what blockchains generally and Bitcoin specifically are good for: Some want faster or more transactions, others are worried about ensuring nodes remain distributed bigger blocks need more bandwidthstill others have security concerns.
And, just as some Bitcoin adherents see a digital currency as a desirable alternative to traditional fiat currencies, some of those opposing a change are simply opposed to change period, at least to changing anything specifically designed by Satoshi. When bitcoin academic articles on diversity block size debate was first heating up last summer, Bitcoin Core developer Gregory Maxwell put his finger on the philosophy of Bitcoin bitcoin academic articles on diversity.
Fundamentally this question exposes ideological differences between people interested in Bitcoin. Is Bitcoin more of a digital gold or is it more of a competitor to Square? Is Bitcoin something that should improve personal and commercial autonomy from central banks? Or from just the existing status-quo bitcoin academic articles on diversity banks? Do participants have a right to mine? How much control should third parties have over their transactions?
How much security must be provided? Is there a deadline for world domination or bust? Is Bitcoin only for the developed world? Must it be totally limited by the most impoverished parts of the world? Bitcoin exists at the intersection of many somewhat overlapping belief systems.
Maxwell has made similar comments elsewhere, including in this forum thread:. The rules are Bitcoin. If the rules can be easily rewritten against the will of some users by others according to political whim then what can be trusted? Is the supply fixed? Will coins be confiscated and awarded to others? I think governance is incredibly hard and that the development history of fiat currencies shows that mankind is ill-equipped to create a strong and sound system via human governance — not through lack of trying, but because mankind is fundamentally not cut out for it: I can certainly see the allure of a system that seeks to take all decision-making authority out of the hands of individuals: If humans made the rules, then appealing to the rules can never be non-political.
Facebook has over the last few years self-documented just how unrepresentative they are when it comes bitcoin academic articles on diversity demographic diversity: It was Twitter that exposed me to fact that I, despite my expressed support for women and diversity, had my own blind spots. The criticism was absolutely fair: You could certainly say the same thing about Twitter the company: Dick Costolo, the CEO I was criticizing, did finally admit Twitter had an abuse problemand current CEO Jack Dorsey has taken some steps to address it, but said problem may be intractable thanks to decisions made in the earliest days of Twitter, particularly the allowance of anonymous accounts that can -mention anyone on the service.
The importance of understanding the inherently political nature of rules goes deeper than simply saying diversity is important; it also gets at how we as an industry should think about solutions. It is tempting to bitcoin academic articles on diversity that companies should simply double-down on meritocracy and ensure they are selecting the best possible candidate; remove human judgment to the greatest degree possible. But then it must be asked, on what criteria would hiring decisions be made?
I get the allure of simply declaring that from now on everything is equal: More broadly, I hope that the fundamental humanity that goes into any decision — product, policy, or otherwise — is appreciated by everyone in tech. Just as products and companies are either growing or dying, so too efforts to make the technology industry more accurately reflect, and thus better serve and better monetize! What I found most interesting, though, was what Maxwell stated in the previous paragraph: Maxwell has made similar comments elsewhere, including in this forum thread: Wrapped Around an Axle.
Is Bitcoin academic articles on diversity an Echo? Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
