Why shouldn't Bitcoin be upgraded frequently? See how tech leaders interpret Bitcoin Core's conservative philosophy

【Crypto World】Regarding how the Bitcoin protocol should evolve, industry insiders have proposed an interesting perspective: conservatism can actually be an advantage.

Bitcoin Core v30 takes a very cautious stance on protocol changes, underpinned by deep logic. When modifying a global consensus layer like Bitcoin, any change must undergo extremely rigorous evaluation. Simply put, it’s about waiting until there is clear global consensus— for example, when 8 billion people worldwide believe that quantum computing poses a real threat, then network upgrades should be initiated.

But what is the reality? Often, half of the community supports it, while the other half opposes. In such cases, the correct approach is not to push forward forcefully but to slow down. These changes must be very, very cautious.

There is a common misconception here: Bitcoin’s lack of rapid change and frequent iteration is not a flaw, but actually an advantage. As a monetary protocol, stability itself is a value.

Looking at projects that are eager to add new features constantly, they can easily fall into a trap— assuming that more features are always better, which might actually ruin a system originally designed with excellence. Bitcoin’s restraint philosophy, summed up as “less is more,” is perfectly fitting.

This discussion touches on the core issues of blockchain governance: technological innovation vs. stability, rapid iteration vs. global consensus. For Bitcoin, as a store of value and payment infrastructure, the direction of this balance has already become quite clear.