What Is Bitcoin Ossification And Is It a Good or a Bad Thing?

Is ossification good for the future of Bitcoin? This simple question is extremely difficult to answer because the decentralized nature of Bitcoin means that it can be different things to different people. 

For some, it might be a censorship-resistant peer-to-peer payment network, for others it’s a store of value, while others might see it as an emerging smart contract platform, among many other things. 

However, all these different perspectives require different approaches to how this protocol is being developed. Therefore, a debate is ongoing about Bitcoin ossification, or whether this protocol should stay open to changing its key rules and experimenting. 

Some view ossification as a safeguard for security, stability, and institutional trust, while others argue it could hinder innovation, scalability, and competitiveness. 

As Bitcoin continues to evolve, the key question remains: Should it remain flexible or be set in stone?

What Is Bitcoin Ossification?

Bitcoin ossification refers to the increasing resistance to changes in its core protocol to ensure its stability, security, and predictability as more and more people are starting to use it. 

Moreover, as the number of key players such as miners, node runners, and developers is growing along the user base of Bitcoin, implementing modifications requires broad consensus, which is difficult to achieve.

A useful analogy is bureaucratization. A small startup can adapt quickly, but as it grows into a large corporation, decision-making slows due to complex approval processes as many more things are at stake now. 

Similarly, Bitcoin began as an experimental project but has since evolved into a widely used and robust cryptocurrency network, making significant changes more difficult to implement. 

Therefore, Bitcoin’s base layer, becomes more rigid. Many users and stakeholders prioritize security and reliability, resisting more substantial changes to the protocol, and subsequently, to new use cases.

Meanwhile, depending on the importance of the upgrade, it might require all Bitcoin node runners to accept it (in case of a hard fork), which might be difficult to achieve with so many players and diverse opinions. 

Less crucial changes might be implemented via a soft fork, which typically requires a majority consensus among Bitcoin’s network participants.

The Case for Bitcoin Ossification: Why Stability Matters

One of the key arguments in favor of Bitcoin ossification is the stability of the protocol and base layer. 

Any new change introduces potential vulnerabilities. No matter how well-designed an update is, it’s nearly impossible to anticipate all possible risks in advance. Moreover, the simpler a system is, the fewer attack vectors it has.

A previous update has remained stable for years, while a new one has yet to stand the test of time. The protocol becomes less predictable in its ability to withstand hacks, network disruptions, rising fees, and more, which might hinder confidence in Bitcoin.

Moreover, ossification and potential stability enhance Bitcoin’s credibility, strengthening trust that, for example, the monetary policy of this network won’t change, a key attribute of sound currency. In an industry where constant change is the norm, even when it comes to the monetary policy of a blockchain, Bitcoin’s resilience makes it a safer asset class.

As a result, institutional players are increasingly drawn to Bitcoin, opening up opportunities in traditional finance and bringing additional liquidity. A notable example is the introduction of spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in the US, which became the most successful launch of ETFs in their history.

However, this rigidity also has its downsides.

The Case Against Bitcoin Ossification: Why Evolution Matters

Despite its benefits, Bitcoin ossification has also significant drawbacks. One major concern is the limited room for innovation. 

Twe two latest Bitcoin protocol changes have already helped the Bitcoin network to become more efficient and private while helping introduce some key innovations.

Bitcoin’s last major update was Taproot, implemented in 2021. It was first proposed in 2018 by developer Gregory Maxwell and improved Bitcoin’s efficiency and privacy, while also inadvertently paving the way for the Ordinals protocol.

An earlier significant upgrade was the Segregated Witness (SegWit) soft fork in 2017, which effectively increased Bitcoin’s block size and helped lower transaction fees. Moreover, SegWit enabled the Lightning Network, which is currently the main Bitcoin Layer 2 (L2) scaling solution.

Therefore, if Bitcoin is slow to adapt to emerging challenges and trends, this would make other, more flexible blockchains  more competitive. Blockchains like Ethereum and Solana frequently update their networks to solve their issues. 

To address this, Layer 2 solutions have been developed on top of Bitcoin’s base layer, Layer 1 (L1). Besides the Lightning Network, many other L2s have started to pop up, such as Rootstock and Stacks and Bitlayer, which aim to introduce smart contracts to the Bitcoin ecosystem, among others. 

Ossification of Bitcoin can also deter new developers who want to introduce innovations and enhance the network but face structural limitations. This may slow the overall growth of the Bitcoin ecosystem and weaken its position compared to other L1s.

The Middle Ground: Can Bitcoin Have Stability and Progress?

​​It’s worth noting that the ossification of the base layer doesn’t mean updates and changes will disappear entirely. More and more L2 solutions for Bitcoin are emerging as the main way to expand this ecosystem and its capabilities. 

‍

As the Lightning Network helped make Bitcoin transactions almost free and instant, other L2s tackle such issues as smart contracts on Bitcoin, interoperability, and more.

Moreover, the boom in Ordinals, BRC-20, and Runes demonstrated how this blockchain can be utilized in more ways. 

Thanks to Ordinals, you can now create NFTs on the Bitcoin blockchain without using smart contracts, while BRC-20 tokens and Runes have also been enabled by this protocol, expanding DeFi on Bitcoin. Meanwhile, as mentioned, Ordinals wouldn’t be possible without the Taproot upgrade.

Is Bitcoin Ossification Good or Bad?

Protocol ossification ensures stability and predictability, reducing the risk of unexpected vulnerabilities, attacks, and revolutionary hard forks—factors that help build investor and user confidence. 

However, this rigidity also limits the adoption of new technologies, creates scalability challenges, weakens Bitcoin’s competitive edge against more adaptable blockchains, and may drive away developers frustrated by the lack of flexibility.

Bitcoin ossification is a process that reinforces its role in the global financial and monetary system. On one hand, it cements Bitcoin’s status as “digital gold” and sound money. On the other, it may limit its flexibility for future changes when competing with other networks.

However, the growth of Layer 2 solutions and other innovations demonstrates that the network can remain adaptable without altering its base layer. To stay relevant in the future, Bitcoin probably needs to strike a balance between stability and the ability to evolve.

‍‍Click here to sign up for Samara’s Monthly Market Commentary to stay up to date with the latest trends and developments in Bitcoin and tech-driven alternative assets.