On December 19, Michael Saylor stated in an interview, “Bitcoin Core v30 is extremely conservative regarding protocol changes. We have always, and must continue to, maintain a high level of caution when modifying the Bitcoin protocol. Any changes to the protocol should be made very carefully. We need to ensure that there is global consensus. When the entire world’s population of 8 billion people reaches consensus and confirms that quantum computing poses a threat, I believe we should upgrade the network. But if only half of the community thinks it’s a good idea and the other half opposes, then I think we should slow down. These changes must be very, very cautious. I have said many times: one of the most effective ways to sabotage the Bitcoin network is to give an extremely talented group of developers unlimited funds and tell them ‘go improve it.’ In my view, the essence of Bitcoin is a monetary protocol, and its lack of rapid change and frequent iteration is precisely its strength, not a flaw. So I am not part of the camp that is eager to constantly add new features to Bitcoin. I believe that the way to ruin something good is to assume that it will fail if it keeps adding features.”
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
Michael Saylor: Bitcoin should only upgrade the network when there is a consensus that quantum computing threats have been addressed
On December 19, Michael Saylor stated in an interview, “Bitcoin Core v30 is extremely conservative regarding protocol changes. We have always, and must continue to, maintain a high level of caution when modifying the Bitcoin protocol. Any changes to the protocol should be made very carefully. We need to ensure that there is global consensus. When the entire world’s population of 8 billion people reaches consensus and confirms that quantum computing poses a threat, I believe we should upgrade the network. But if only half of the community thinks it’s a good idea and the other half opposes, then I think we should slow down. These changes must be very, very cautious. I have said many times: one of the most effective ways to sabotage the Bitcoin network is to give an extremely talented group of developers unlimited funds and tell them ‘go improve it.’ In my view, the essence of Bitcoin is a monetary protocol, and its lack of rapid change and frequent iteration is precisely its strength, not a flaw. So I am not part of the camp that is eager to constantly add new features to Bitcoin. I believe that the way to ruin something good is to assume that it will fail if it keeps adding features.”