Key takeaways:
-
Bitcoin evolves on two clocks: sluggish, consensus-driven modifications on the base layer and quick experimentation on the edges.
-
Main upgrades (similar to Taproot) arrive by cautious smooth forks after lengthy evaluation.
-
Speedy shifts similar to Lightning funds and Ordinals occur with out altering Bitcoin’s core guidelines, which is why headlines transfer quicker than the L1.
-
The “50-year” line is a cue to take a look at the place change happens, whether or not within the core protocol or on the edge, earlier than judging whether or not Bitcoin has really modified.
On November 10, 2025, Ripple chief expertise officer David Schwartz posted a deadpan line on X: “Bitcoin just isn’t the identical now because it was 50 years in the past.”
The gag works as a result of Bitcoin (BTC) launched in 2009, so the “50 years” is clearly tongue-in-cheek, but it surely landed as a result of it pointed to a larger reality about how individuals speak about Bitcoin’s evolution.
Schwartz’s quip got here in a thread arguing that “1 BTC = 1 BTC” and that volatility exists in fiat phrases, not in Bitcoin’s personal unit of account. This framing usually fuels absolutist takes about whether or not Bitcoin modifications in any respect.
Do you know? Rajat Soni, a critic of XRP (XRP), is a CFA charterholder and a Bitcoin-focused finance commentator lively on X.
The joke exposes the timescale confusion
Schwartz’s line works as a result of it highlights a mismatch in how individuals take into consideration time in crypto.
Headlines make it really feel as if Bitcoin modifications in a single day, however the foundations it stands on were built over decades:
-
Public-key cryptography (Diffie-Hellman, 1976)
-
Merkle timber (1979)
-
Proof-of-work precursors similar to Hashcash (1997 and 2002)
-
Digital-cash sketches similar to Wei Dai’s B-money (1998).
Bitcoin’s 2008 design pulled a long time of cryptographic work into a single, operational system. As soon as a protocol with actual worth reaches scale, change slows as a result of coordination prices rise sharply. Researchers and builders now confer with this dynamic as “protocol ossification.”
That sluggish tempo can appear like nothing is altering in any respect, however that isn’t the case. A useful means to consider it’s the Lindy effect, which says that the longer a non-perishable expertise has survived, the longer it’s prone to survive. This is the reason long-standing constructing blocks similar to public-key cryptography and hash timber proceed to assist newer programs. However the Lindy impact is barely a heuristic, not a promise. It describes survival, not inevitability.
So, whenever you zoom out, the joke is a reminder that Bitcoin’s evolution runs on two totally different tempos: the decades-long lineage of its core components and the quicker cycles we see in in the present day’s information.
Do you know? Segregated Witness (Bitcoin Enchancment Proposal 141) activated on Aug. 24, 2017, fixing transaction malleability and enabling capability and Lightning enhancements.
What modifications at Bitcoin’s core (and the way)
On the base layer, Bitcoin does change, however slowly and solely with broad settlement.
Most upgrades are soft forks, which tighten the foundations that nodes implement. Smooth forks create coordination threat between totally different variations of the software program. To cut back disruption, the neighborhood has spent years refining activation strategies similar to BIP-9 and BIP-8 model bits.
In follow, a change strikes from dialogue and specification to testing and, if there’s clear assist, an activation window the place miners and financial nodes sign readiness.
Taproot is the clearest latest instance. Proposed years earlier and activated in November 2021, it added Schnorr signatures and a new output sort that improves effectivity and privateness with out breaking current guidelines.
The path from concept to activation required in depth evaluation and a miner signaling interval earlier than the foundations really switched on. It exhibits that upgrades do arrive, however solely after affected person consensus-building.
At the moment’s debates, similar to reenabling “OP_CAT” or introducing “OP_CTV” (BIP-119), observe the identical sample: incremental programmability proposals present process public analysis, threat evaluation and social evaluation earlier than any activation may even be thought of.
The course of is as a lot about coordination amongst maintainers, reviewers, miners and customers as it’s about code.
Do you know? Bitcoin Script is deliberately not Turing-complete, which limits complexity to maintain validation predictable and secure for all nodes.
The place fast change occurs
The tempo quickens as soon as you progress away from Bitcoin’s base layer.
Cost channels transfer transactions offchain, route them over a mesh and contact the layer 1 solely as a backstop. This is the reason the Lightning Community iterates far quicker than consensus modifications. Its core mechanics, together with hashed timelock contracts and newer approaches, similar to level timelock contracts (PTLCs), let worth transfer throughout intermediaries with out belief.
PTLCs exchange hash-based secrets and techniques with elliptic-curve factors, giving channels higher privateness, extra versatile routing and the flexibility to separate funds throughout a number of paths. As a result of these enhancements reside in implementations fairly than the bottom protocol, they will evolve without a hard consensus vote.
Ordinals and inscriptions present the identical fast-edge dynamic from one other angle: new behaviors rising by utilizing current guidelines. Casey Rodarmor’s scheme numbers satoshis and attaches information to them by Taproot-era scripting, creating collectibles with out altering Bitcoin’s consensus. This is the reason the phenomenon might explode culturally, whereas the bottom protocol remained unchanged.
Each examples spotlight the break up tempo the joke factors to: Layer 2s and client-side programs can add options, UX enhancements and even new markets at excessive pace, whereas the bottom layer modifications not often and intentionally. Headlines are likely to observe the sting, similar to Lightning upgrades or inscription waves, whereas the chain’s core advances in rigorously staged steps.
The deeper lesson
Schwartz’s “50-year Bitcoin” line sticks as a result of it compresses how crypto actually evolves into a single joke: a sluggish, conservative core that not often modifications and a quick, ingenious edge that does.
The sluggish core is by design. As soon as a financial protocol has billions at stake, upgrades transfer solely after prolonged evaluation and broad social consensus, a dynamic broadly mentioned as protocol ossification.
But sluggish just isn’t the identical as caught. Concrete paths for change exist, such because the soft-fork observe for brand new opcodes like “OP_CAT” and “OP_CTV,” which might develop Bitcoin’s transaction programmability. These observe multi-quarter or multi-year timelines fairly than information cycles.
In the meantime, new conduct can explode on the edges with out touching consensus. Ordinals and inscriptions did precisely that by numbering satoshis and attaching information utilizing guidelines already in place.
Overlook the years. Consider the comment as a decoder. If a declare about Bitcoin “altering” doesn’t specify the place (base layer or edge) and the way (consensus improve or emergent use), it’s lacking the purpose the joke highlighted.
