Bitcoin Core Developer Adam Back Refutes Improper Modification Proposals Using TCP/IP Analogy
Bitcoin core developer Adam Back posted that when evaluating Bitcoin modification proposals, one can test: if similar changes were made to TCP/IP, would the goals be achieved?
He pointed out that Bitcoin, like the internet, is ungovernable and cannot prevent spam and other phenomena through protocol-level modifications; such ideas are misleading.
Adam Back emphasized that he is not against all changes, but opposes unfeasible proposals that undermine the fundamentals of Bitcoin, reiterating that the physical characteristics of the internet render such governance attempts ineffective, and there are established methods to address spam issues.
In terms of market mechanisms, Adam Back, as a guardian of the protocol, strengthens the community's consensus on core principles, attempting to put pressure on the proposers of modifications, while long-term Bitcoin holders benefit from the preservation of censorship resistance and immutability. The discussion at the protocol level has shifted towards understanding fundamental physical limitations.
Source: Public Information
ABAB AI Insight
As the inventor of Hashcash and an early contributor to Bitcoin, Adam Back has long adhered to protocol minimalism and has repeatedly explained Bitcoin's design philosophy through analogies with internet protocols. This TCP/IP test continues his emphasis on the boundaries of governance.
In terms of capital pathways, Core developers engage the community's attention through public debate, avoiding resource waste on unfeasible proposals, and strategically maintaining Bitcoin's scarcity and security attributes as digital gold to support its long-term value storage positioning.
Similar to the early Block Size debate emphasizing the limits of decentralization, the current Bitcoin ecosystem is in a phase of protocol stability following Layer 2 expansion, with Adam Back's stance highlighting the protection of its ungovernable nature.
Essentially, this represents a transfer of pricing power within technological alternatives, where attempts to achieve governance through protocol modifications face internet-level physical constraints, leading to a concentration of power among developers and holders who adhere to the original design. Mechanically, this ungovernable characteristic is the core of Bitcoin's censorship resistance and value capture.
ABAB News · Law of Cognition
Protocols like the internet, governance fantasies ultimately hit physical boundaries
Ungovernability is not a bug, but Bitcoin's strongest moat
If you want to change the foundation, first change TCP/IP—if you can't, don't touch Bitcoin