David Schwartz on Bitcoin Hard Forks
David Schwartz, the former Chief Technology Officer of Ripple, recently shared his thoughts on the implications of Bitcoin hard forks during a discussion on the social media platform X. The conversation began when a user expressed skepticism about the merit of a new proof-of-work (PoW) fork, drawing comparisons with Bitcoin Cash and the recent BIP-110 proposal. The user raised concerns that while forks may tackle immediate issues—like balancing network spam—they fail to resolve deeper governance problems inherent in the original blockchain.
The user questioned: “If the original chain is seen as compromised, how does launching a new PoW fork make a difference? Even if it introduces desirable features, won’t it face the same issues if it gains popularity?”
In contrast, Schwartz offered a different viewpoint. He argued that the essence of a PoW fork lies in providing users with options, enabling them to choose between different governing rules.
“The purpose of the fork is to allow all participants to select which set of rules they prefer to follow. If individuals from the less popular side eventually switch to the more successful side, it indicates that they favor the outcomes that the latter provides,”
he stated, highlighting that forks can serve as a solution when users disagree with existing network rules.
This statement implies that options are necessary for users dissatisfied with their current network, as they can migrate to a more appealing alternative if it emerges.
BIP-110 and Its Short-Lived Chain
On the previous Saturday, a new minority chain stemming from the support of BIP-110 attempted to break away from Bitcoin but was short-lived, only managing to sustain two blocks before it ceased operations. BIP-110, known formally as the Reduced Data Temporary Softfork, was proposed by the anonymous developer Dathon Ohm, with contributions from Luke Dashjr, a notable figure behind the Bitcoin Knots node implementation.
The proposal imposed a one-year consensus restriction on various forms of arbitrary data included within Bitcoin transactions. This encompassed Ordinals (akin to non-fungible tokens), as well as BRC-20 and Runes, both of which represent fungible tokens. It outlined seven significant rules addressing output size limits and caps for data pushes, specifically targeting features like OP_RETURN, Taproot annexes, and control blocks.
