10 February on the YouTube channel ForkLog was held the next issue of the rubric "Bitcoinization", the guest of which was bitcoin developer Gleb Naumenko. Release topic - technology, which will change the bitcoin network already in 2020 year.
ForkLog editors chose the most interesting moments from the stream.
Schnorr and Taproot soft forks launch dates:
Judging by the reaction of the community and other developers, there is a strong consensus, that everything is going as it should. I think, what 2020 the year will be the year, when all these updates arrive.
Regulators' reaction to the increased privacy of bitcoin:
The threat is, that when the regulator sees the transaction, which is more anonymous, than the other, or the coins are more anonymous, they may start to "fine" them, says - "we do not accept this". Fundamentally, this problem grows out of, that there are two classes of coins - more private and less private.
In my opinion, this problem is much more relevant to mixers, although less 1% Coins, these coins are clearly under threat.
Ideally, - at least in my head, - when users see, that the exchange bans mixed coins, they go to that exchange, which does not do this, - vote in dollar. This is how the ecosystem supports itself., because the right to be private is very important, especially for bitcoin. How it will be in practice - we do not know. Maybe, traders won't care, and the bulk of the volume will remain on Binance, which blocks user accounts.
I think, that there is no such threat regarding Taproot. By then,, when it comes to the regulator, how Taproot works and why it enhances privacy, there will already be a critical mass of users. When half of bitcoiners will use Taproot addresses, it will be too late.
About rewards for holders of a full bitcoin node:
My opinion: you need to make the launch of the node as cheap as possible, so that it is invisible. You want to make a profit, because launching a node takes effort. We want to reduce effort and increase awareness of the benefits - in terms of privacy, Security, because you help the system, when you start the node. No idea about rewards.
About the possibility of an attack from the side of the node holders:
Bitcoin is naturally protected from these things anymore, than other systems, because the ability to verify yourself is as simple as possible. This is why it is important not to have a million transactions per second., because if you run a node, it is very easy for you to find the longest chain and work on it, because the Bitcoin rule is the hardest, and, with more Proof-of-Work, this is a valid chain. You just need to find at least one honest node with this chain, and then you just have to try to tell other people, what do you know about her.
Today we have approximately 60 000 nod i 10 000 public - those, who are on public IP addresses and help others. Today, the main thing is to get honest people to launch nodes - that is, to somehow lower the launch price.
Bitcoin as a new standard for national currencies:
It seems to me, you can't get attached to something, than so easily manipulated. If the capitalization of bitcoin is 10% from gold, then we can talk about it.
On the possibility of terminating the service of the main Bitcoin network:
I always say, if Bitcoin transactions are censored for three days or a week, then I finish working on it and leave. Or attack 51% for quite a long time. If the transaction cannot go through for three days, which someone does not like because of the consolidation of mining, then Bitcoin instantly loses value for me.
About "plan B" in the case of the implementation of the above-mentioned scenario:
There are fundamentally two different situations here.. First, a quantum computer appears or something like that., what broke the hash function, SHA-2, can mine blocks faster than anyone else and get 51%. In this case, you can fork to another hash function.. There must be understanding, that it won't happen a second time, that this is a super unique phenomenon. I think, that we will solve it quickly with understanding, that this is not a systemic problem. And then, I think, that Bitcoin will continue to live, although it will drop four times - all the old hashrate can be thrown into the trash. Yet again, let's see, how the market will react.
The second scenario is a systemic problem with game theory, that is, it was profitable for someone to accumulate 51% and start censoring or mining the wrong blocks, fork into some modified protocol, then it's clear, that this situation will happen again. It's not interesting anymore. This means, that Satoshi was wrong.
About theoretical distribution of bitcoins belonging to Satoshi:
This is a very subtle sensitive topic.. I think, that a bunch of libertarians would be socialists, if they knew, how to honestly distribute wealth among people. This is one of these cornerstone and so far unsolvable issues..
