Juadom (🌽🕵️♂️)☁️🕊️🕘🌐📱 retweetledi
I am getting insanely tired of hearing a false narrative that we abandoned scaling in favor of governance. There was continuous effort and work from before even Shelley on scaling (for example eprint.iacr.org/2018/1119.pdf)
It was an enormously challenging problem that we relentlessly attacked from many different angles including L2 innovations, a brand new accounting model- eutxo- zero knowledge ideas, partnerchains, and capstoning with Leios.
Many of these ideas required deep r&d and original publications. This cannot be made faster by throwing more people at it. It's research. In the meantime while the research was being done, we implemented Voltaire because it unlocks the treasury for the entire community to use thereby making Cardano stronger and also scaling will require many parameter changes we cannot unilaterally make.
No one was pulled from scaling research and development. There were dozens of scientists and engineers brainstorming and prototyping for years. A semi-centralized and not secure halfway house could have been implemented that crashed all the time like other blockchains. Or we could do it right like we've always done things with the Cardano ecosystem. We chose the latter.
We now have a full design for Leios, Peras, and a great L2 strategy. They are elegant and future proof. We now have the best scaling strategy in the entire cryptocurrency space. That's what the time bought us.
Implementing Voltaire means that every single one of you has a voice and vote on when and how to turn that on. You also exercised that vote and voice on a desire for a multi-client ecosystem. So it's going to be turned on multiple times by independent teams. That's the point of governance.
Critics somehow argue that we should have just made a mad rush for scalability, robbed everybody of a voice, and somehow we would be ahead today.
What that means in practice is none of you would be dreps, there would no constitution, no constitutional committee, you would have no say when and how we upgrade the network, you would have no say on client diversity, there would be no legitimate members-based organizations, we would have no legitimate- community endorsed- road map, and over a billion Ada would be locked for no one to use.
The very fact that Bitcoin is having an issue trying to figure out whether to steal Satoshi's money for the "greater good" (BIP361) or just simply let someone else steal it (BIP360) is the single greatest endorsement of the value of governance. It's going to literally break their ecosystem into two halves and cause catastrophic economic harm. We will completely sidestep this issue thanks to governance.
English
