Bitcoin developers couldn’t settle on the specifics of Taproot’s activation, so they used a “coin toss” on the Bitcoin blockchain this Tuesday to wrap up activation discussions that began a year ago.
According to blockchain data pulled from this journalist’s Bitcoin node, the result of the coin toss has determined that Taproot’s activation timeline will be measured using median time passed (MTP) instead of block height.
Taproot – an upgrade that will enrich Bitcoin’s smart contracts – is all set to go using the “Speedy Trial” activation method outlined a month ago. Today’s coin toss settled a dispute, though, over how the Bitcoin blockchain will measure the time that has passed between when the upgrade is released and when it will “time-out.”
Block height vs MTP
Related: Ripple Granted Access to SEC Documents on Bitcoin, Ether in Ongoing XRP Fight
There were two options up for debate: one using “block height,” which chooses a timeout that triggers once a specific block is mined and the other using MTP, which chooses the timeout based on real-world time derived from block data.
The coin toss occurred on block 678079 and the result landed on MTP. Following the result, Bitcoin Core contributor Andrew Chow removed his pull request for a block height-based scheme.
MTP means that, when Taproot’s code is shipped, miners and node operators will have a time period of exactly three months to upgrade to Taproot before a timeout period is reached.
If miners representing 90% of Bitcoin’s hashrate upgrade in this timeframe, then Taproot is “locked in” and it will activate three months after this lock-in. Assuming Taproot is shipped by May, this means the upgrade would be fully functional on Bitcoin’s blockchain no later than November.
Related: Goldman’s Ex-Head of Digital Assets Joins Talos: Report
“We have two good options, and coinflip is people agreeing to put aside minute preferences on two acceptable options for the big picture,” Bitcoin Core contributor Jeremy Rubin wrote in a Bitcoin devlist email. “As such, I think that a coinflip is appropriately used in this circumstance, although I recognize the sentiment that some may feel it’s treating development a little too *flippantly*.”
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
Go to Source