The Bitcoin Community Has a Choice to Make: Regression or Progression

Article source, here.

TL;DR

• Thanks to the rise of NFTs and meme coins on the Bitcoin network, some folks are suggesting the ZK-Proof functionality be added to Bitcoin (to speed things up).

• But many in the Bitcoin community are much like your stodgy uncle (they don't like change) - and adding ZK-Proofs would require a 'hard fork.'

• Think of it like that time Coca Cola created New Coke alongside Classic Coke. They released the two and let consumers choose their favorite. Same goes for hard forks.

• The problem is one side wants to move forward, while the other doesn’t want to just stay put, they want to move backwards and wipe Bitcoin NFTs and meme coins from existence.

• Our guess at the end result? A stalemate where change to the network only happens if it's a need to have, and not a nice to have.

Full Story

Imagine you're loading two trucks with cargo.

When loading the first, all the cargo has been pre-checked (everything that is meant to be in each box has been reviewed and verified).

But on the second, that cargo 'pre check' hasn't been carried out. Which means you need to open, check, verify, repack, and load every. single. box.

In crypto, 'Zero Knowledge Proofs' (ZK-Proofs) function like the cargo on truck #1. Each transaction in the group has been previously verified.

Meaning the computers processing them don't need to check that they're legitimate (zero knowledge is required to prove they're legit).

Without ZK-Proofs, the process looks more like truck #2 - a long and arduous computational process where each transaction is checked, one-by-one.

Thanks to the rise of NFTs and meme coins on the Bitcoin network, some folks are suggesting the ZK-Proof functionality be added to Bitcoin - to speed things up and lower the  crazy congestion  that's been experienced of late.

And here's where there conflict starts...

Many in the Bitcoin community are much like your stodgy uncle (they don't like change).

Adding ZK-Proofs would require a 'hard fork' - meaning creating a new version of the Bitcoin network and seeing which one folks gravitate towards.

Think of it like that time Coca Cola created New Coke alongside Classic Coke. They released the two and let consumers choose their favorite.

Same goes for hard forks.

(And in the past, the miners processing BTC transactions - along with the users of the network - have chosen 'Classic Bitcoin').

But that's not where the debate really lies...

In reality, one side of the argument is for the change, while the other is arguing something along the lines of:

"We don't want to put effort into making more accommodations for NFTs and meme coins on BTC - we want to put effort into wiping them from existence!"

Here's the problem with all of that:

Making progress in either direction is going to be tough.

It feels as though too many users have embraced NFTs and meme coins on Bitcoin for them to be outright axed. Meanwhile, a well supported hard fork feels just as unlikely...

Our guess at the result?

A stalemate where change to the network only happens if it's a need to have, and not a nice to have.