No, BlackRock Won’t Ossify Bitcoin
Follow Aaron on Nostr or X. In his Take from Wednesday, Shinobi argued that the surge of institutional bitcoin adoption will lead to premature ossification of the Bitcoin protocol. While I share his concern to an extent,...
Archive context
Older archive item. Useful for background and entity history, but not a fresh market-moving signal.
In his Take from Wednesday, Shinobi argued that the surge of institutional bitcoin adoption will lead to premature ossification of the Bitcoin protocol. While I share his concern to an extent, I am less convinced this is necessarily true.
Bitcoin is inherently a permissionsless system. For protocol changes specifically, it “just” requires users to upgrade their software. And when it comes to deploying soft forks, it really only needs a majority of miners to upgrade. (This is admittedly a simplification for the sake of brevity, but I’d say it’s still “true enough” to state it this way.)
Miners will for the most part follow economic incentives. If a protocol upgrade makes Bitcoin (say) more scalable or more private, there is actually good reason to think this would make Bitcoin more valuable, which in turn means there is good reason to think miners will activate the upgrade.
Even in an extreme scenario where a soft fork occurs through a user activated soft fork (UASF) that splits the blockchain, and even if in this scenario the institutions prefer the non-upgraded version of the chain (this is the scenario Shinobi is ultimately envisioning), it’s not obvious to me that the non-upgraded chain would “win”.
Just owning lots of bitcoin does not give you a “say” on which side of a chain split is more valuable. Initially, everyone receives coins on both sides. Only if you’re willing to buy or sell these coins (eg.: “dump” coins on one side of the split to get more coins on the other side) does your economic weight matter. But this means you have to take a risk: skin in the game.
Would big institutions really be willing to bet everything they own on the version of the protocol without the upgrade? That’s a big assumption to make.
This article is a Take. Opinions expressed are entirely the author's and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.
Why this matters
This bitcoin story adds another data point to the current market tape and is useful when read alongside nearby source coverage.
Original source
Read on Bitcoin MagazineRelated market context
Bitcoin enters its best season after a 43% surge, with $147,000 suddenly on the math
Bitcoin is closing its strongest quarter since 2024 after leaving US stocks and gold far behind despite surging bond yields. The l...
Chainlink’s Sergey Nazarov joins Microsoft and Parallax Ventures for Sibos AI panel
The panel highlights AI's potential to transform finance, raising critical questions about trust, data reliability, and system int...
Standard Chartered says Ethena’s ENA could crush Bitcoin and Ethereum returns by 2028
Standard Chartered expects Ethena’s ENA token to rise about sevenfold by 2028, provided the protocol can rebuild its shrinking syn...
Aave’s $50 million lending plan could lose money without a single default
Aave’s proposed institutional lending business would put crypto collateral on both sides of the financing chain. Institutions woul...
New Bitcoin upgrade catches hidden key leaks hiding the exact fix
Bitcoin improvement proposal BIP461 could make a hidden route for leaking wallet secrets easier to detect. The draft defines a com...
XRP Price Battling Resistances as BlackRock Rumors Pop
XRP price is trading near $1.51 after falling about 5% in a week, while BlackRock rumors of a spot XRP ETF resurface. The immediat...