Reflection on the Bitcoin Block Size War

Recently, I finished reading two books that mainly document the history of the Bitcoin block size war in the 2010s, representing two opposing viewpoints:

• Jonathan Bier's "The Blocksize War" discusses from the perspective of supporting small blocks.
• "Hijacking Bitcoin" by Roger Ver and Steve Patterson discusses from the perspective of supporting large Blocks.

Reading these two historical books that document events I have personally experienced and participated in is fascinating. Although I am quite familiar with most of the events and the narratives from both sides, I still found some interesting details and re-examined these situations from a new perspective. At that time, I was a pragmatic moderate Block supporter, advocating for a moderate increase in Block size, opposing extreme growth or absolutist claims. So do I still hold the same view now? Let's take a look.

Views of the Small Block Faction

In Bier's narrative, the small block faction focuses not only on the specific issue of block size but also emphasizes the decision-making methods at the protocol level. They believe that:

• Protocol changes (, especially hard forks ), should be very rare and require a high consensus among users.
• The unique value of Bitcoin lies in its resistance to centralized control, requiring the avoidance of frequent governance and manipulation by big players.
• The big block faction attempts to have a few large players push for changes, which goes against the idea of decentralization.

The Viewpoint of the Big Block Faction

In Ver's narrative, the core issue of the big block faction is the essence of Bitcoin:

• Bitcoin should be digital cash rather than digital gold.
• Satoshi Nakamoto's original vision supports a gradual increase in block size.
• Small block routes will drive users towards centralized second-layer solutions.

My Views on the Block Size War

At that time, I tended to support the big block faction, mainly based on the following points:

1. High transaction fees may stifle digital cash use cases, and second-layer solutions have not been sufficiently tested.
2. The statement from the small block faction regarding "user control" lacks a clear definition.
3. The segregated witness scheme is overly complex, violating the principle of keeping the protocol simple.
4. The small block party conducts improper censorship on social media.

But I am also disappointed by some of the practices of the big block faction:

• Unwilling to agree to any reasonable block size limit principle
• The argument that Bitcoin should be controlled by miners is difficult to justify.
• Repeatedly making mistakes in technical implementation has damaged its own credibility.

One-sided Capability Trap

By reading these two books, I discovered a common political tragedy: one side monopolizes all capable individuals but promotes narrow viewpoints; the other side recognizes the problem but lacks execution ability. This "one-sided capability trap" can be seen in many political and social contexts.

The big block faction seems unaware of the need to have the capability to execute; they believed that simply being correct on the issue of block size would allow them to win. This ultimately led to a heavy price to pay, as they continued to split multiple times even after forking out an independent chain.

The Importance of Technological Innovation

In this debate, new technologies like ZK-SNARKs are almost completely absent. In fact, the ultimate method to alleviate political tensions is often new technology, rather than simple compromise. We have seen several examples of this in Ethereum, such as BLS aggregation, EIP-7702, and multidimensional Gas.

When an ecosystem stops embracing new technologies, it inevitably stagnates and becomes more contentious. This is also why I hold a cautious attitude towards the view that "technology cannot solve social problems."

Insights for the Future

Bitcoin and the experiences of other digital communities provide us with important insights:

• The Importance of Client Diversity
• The necessity of avoiding one-sided ability traps
• The ongoing splitting risk that may result from the forking strategy
• The importance of practical execution and construction capabilities

I recommend reading these two books, not only to understand the history of Bitcoin but also to draw lessons from the first civil war of the "digital nation" to provide references for the construction of future digital societies.