BTC L2 正统定义引起争议 海外大佬怎么看？

The author's Chinese source Recently, the technical editor of Bitcoin magazine, an old and authoritative media of Bitcoin, issued a policy on the tokens and reporting qualifications of its magazine, in which the right definition was given. Without tokens, the withdrawal without trust could not run without Bitcoin, which caused a heated discussion. Let's take a look at the wonderful comment area and the responses of the big bosses. Someone gave a Pareto diagram about the concern of all overseas communities in the comment area, hoping that Bitcoin magazine could stamp one by one to let everyone know what could be reported by them. The magazine replied that we are looking for a full-time reporter who will devote time to analyzing these contents. Someone directly asked three people who are concerned by overseas communities, and in the eyes of Bitcoin magazine editors, whether the reply is to meet all three standards of them, and not to use non-tokens as original assets, so it is not possible that the co-founder who saw the relevant discussion directly tweeted that Bitcoin magazine will not affect at all and that only it can best meet the needs of users and be free. What matters is that the market wins. He advocates the free development of the market. Everyone should concentrate on expanding the market share of Bitcoin. Someone asked if there is a chain that directly says that it is a side chain without emphasizing that it is. He replied that the complete use of the side chain as a primary asset can meet the standards, but for the operation that cannot be separated from Bitcoin, he believes that it is also in line with the rational management partner of Lianchuang, Pizza Ninja Lianchuang. Disappointed, even sarcastic, he thinks that this so-called standard directly affects all those who have their own original tokens, and it seems that almost every reputable investment company and analyst in this field will be in the same position. He said that this move will undermine innovation, which also leads to no one and institution wanting to build cool things on Bitcoin in the past three years. For the decentralization bridge and security mechanism he explained in depth, they need to have their own. This token serves its users for a reasonable and legal purpose. Bitcoin magazine thinks that a second tier must be used as a local token, otherwise it is bad. This view is ridiculous and has no reasonable technical or economic basis. It is not based on facts, but on personal opinions and politics. As a person who has written three technical review articles for Bitcoin magazine, he personally ranks many new and interesting just because he has his own token. More ironically, he asked, these are still encouraged to sponsor Bitcoin magazines for hundreds of thousands of dollars and treated as third-class citizens, which is a bit tasteless. Can these be allowed to sponsor magazine media but not enough to be included in important technical analysis or cover news value and Bitcoin innovation? After that, he expressed the hope that Bitcoin magazines can reconsider their position, which is based on technical and economic basis rather than arbitrary personal opinions. We are entering. In a new era of bitcoin innovation, the worst thing that Bitcoin magazine can do is to start to exclude a large number of bitcoin builders according to arbitrary standards. Well-known investors in the industry criticized that it is too early to introduce standards. It seems that Bitcoin magazine began to do halal tests before real untrusted solutions even existed. If you are not halal enough, you will be regarded as a parasite. Why don't you write about possible solutions to technical challenges first? The market helped them make a big censorship hypothesis. According to their standards, the schemes that are basically either too idealistic to be done or can be realized first are excluded. Some people ridiculed that basically all of them can't be called. It can be seen that the community has a negative attitude that this standard is too harsh and hinders innovation. In fact, there have been many similar discussions in the Ethereum community. For example, God supported it at first, and then changed his mind on some issues and even reversed it many times. Therefore, no matter what the standard is, it has to be handed over to the market for practice. To quote the words of group friends, we can fly with confidence. 比特币今日价格行情网_okx交易所app_永续合约_比特币怎么买卖交易_虚拟币交易所平台

注册有任何问题请添加 微信：MVIP619 拉你进入群

文章转载注明 网址：https://netpsp.com/?id=60472