đź“… Original date posted:2012-12-04
đź“ť Original message:On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Alan Reiner <etotheipi at gmail.com> wrote:
> Greg's point looks like it's veering towards "we don't want to grow
> the network unless we're going to get more full nodes out of it."
No…
There is no fundamental completion between taking what actions we can
to maximize the decentralization of the network and making the
software maximally friendly and painless to get started with and use.
It's possible— not even deep rocket science— to create software that
accommodates both.
And because of this, I don't think it's acceptable to promote
solutions which may endanger the decentralization that makes the
system worthwhile in the first place. If the current experience is so
poor that you'd even consider talking about promoting directions which
reduce its robustness then thats evidence that it would be worth
finding more resources to make the experience better without doing
anything the that reduces the model, even if you've got an argument
that maybe we can get away with it. If there isn't interest in
putting in more resources to make these improvements then maybe the
issue isn't as bad as we think it is?
> I think it is very much in everyone's interest here to encourage new users to start "using" Bitcoin, even if they don't "support" it.
Absolutely— and yet that has nothing to do with promoting software to
users which only consumes without directly contributing and which
doesn't even have the capability to do so even if the user wants to
(or much less, is indifferent).
Gregory Maxwell [ARCHIVE] /
npub1f2…crwet
2023-06-07 10:46:06
in reply to nevent1q…j4y0
Author Public Key
npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwetPublished at
2023-06-07 10:46:06Event JSON
{
"id": "11af48da9339ba9bc6f41ee284feba75f94418a272260210f95e1697da42d0e9",
"pubkey": "4aa6cf9aa5c8e98f401dac603c6a10207509b6a07317676e9d6615f3d7103d73",
"created_at": 1686134766,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"c80d71acc598e43ca306127e20ad63b07c82e4d43519cd67fa3dcb170b78955c",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"172a55657ae8fbb40cb951c9a55ffb50c9d494ca1b9974bbc8a1148daf1074a1",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"86f42bcb76a431c128b596c36714ae73a42cae48706a9e5513d716043447f5ec"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2012-12-04\n📝 Original message:On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Alan Reiner \u003cetotheipi at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e Greg's point looks like it's veering towards \"we don't want to grow\n\u003e the network unless we're going to get more full nodes out of it.\"\n\nNo…\n\nThere is no fundamental completion between taking what actions we can\nto maximize the decentralization of the network and making the\nsoftware maximally friendly and painless to get started with and use.\nIt's possible— not even deep rocket science— to create software that\naccommodates both.\n\nAnd because of this, I don't think it's acceptable to promote\nsolutions which may endanger the decentralization that makes the\nsystem worthwhile in the first place. If the current experience is so\npoor that you'd even consider talking about promoting directions which\nreduce its robustness then thats evidence that it would be worth\nfinding more resources to make the experience better without doing\nanything the that reduces the model, even if you've got an argument\nthat maybe we can get away with it. If there isn't interest in\nputting in more resources to make these improvements then maybe the\nissue isn't as bad as we think it is?\n\n\u003e I think it is very much in everyone's interest here to encourage new users to start \"using\" Bitcoin, even if they don't \"support\" it.\n\nAbsolutely— and yet that has nothing to do with promoting software to\nusers which only consumes without directly contributing and which\ndoesn't even have the capability to do so even if the user wants to\n(or much less, is indifferent).",
"sig": "a63a797f5e42863477dc48c1045b4b681bbc5d5be2f4e7c3f404b91607fe62f76441450fa55e01c69abc26491b13bd4a4c4031e8a0d5271abfb7b674e7f4bb1a"
}