"Ossification is complacency. Yes, we all agree that Bitcoin is great. But _I do not agree_ that Bitcoin has reached its full potential. I think complacency is one of the greatest threats to Bitcoin - we must not rest upon our laurels." — Lopp

How should we frame the debate between ossification vs continuous development and planning for future soft forks of the Bitcoin protocol? Is there a clear and obvious path that can be argued for, or is there something else at play that limits both sides of the debate, possibly presenting a false dichotomy that can be overcome? We dive into a great article laying out the perspective of bitcoin OG, Jameson Lopp, followed by a short take by Aaron Von Wirdum before Guy's take to pull it all together.

To change Bitcoin, or to not change Bitcoin? Is that really the question?

Check out the original article by Jameson Lopp at "