📅 Original date posted:2015-06-15
📝 Original message:Who is actually planning to move to Bitcoin-XT if this happens?
Just Gavin and Mike?
> On Jun 15, 2015, at 6:17 PM, Faiz Khan <faizkhan00 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm quite puzzled by the response myself, it doesn't seem to address some of the (more serious) concerns that Adam put out, the most important question that was asked being the one regarding personal ownership of the proposed fork:
>
> "How do you plan to deal with security & incident response for the duration you describe where you will have control while you are deploying the unilateral hard-fork and being in sole maintainership control?"
>
> I do genuinely hope that whomever (now and future) wishes to fork the protocol reconsider first whether they are truly ready to test/flex their reputation/skills/resources in this way... Intuitively, to me it seems counterproductive, and I don't fully believe it is within a single developer's talents to manage the process start-to-finish (as it is non-trivial to hard-fork successfully, others have rehashed this in other threads)...
>
> That being said I think it appropriate if Adam's questions were responded in-line when Mike is feeling up to it. I think that the answers are important for the community to hear when such a drastic change is being espoused.
>
> Faiz
>
>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Bryan Bishop <kanzure at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Mike Hearn <mike at plan99.net> wrote:
>>> Re: anyone who agrees with noted non-programmers Mike&Gavin must be non-technical, stupid, uninformed, etc .... OK, go ahead and show them the error of their ways. Anyone can write blogs.
>>
>> I worry that if this is the level of care you take with reading and (mis)interpreting Adam's messages, that you might not be taking extreme care with evaluating consensus changes, even while tired or sleeping. I encourage you to evaluate both messages and source code more carefully, especially in the world of bitcoin. However, this goes for everyone and not just you. Specifically, when Adam mentioned your conversations with non-technical people, he did not mean "Mike has talked with people who have possibly not made pull requests to Bitcoin Core, so therefore Mike is a non-programmer". Communication is difficult and I can understand that, but we really have to be more careful when evaluating each other's messages; technical miscommunication can be catastrophic in this context. On the topic of whether you are a programmer, I suspect that ever since you built CIA.vc we have all known you're a programmer, Mike.
>>
>> - Bryan
>> http://heybryan.org/
>> 1 512 203 0507
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>> --
>>
>> My regards,
>>
>> Faiz Khan
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150615/6de7b490/attachment.html>;
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image1.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 22107 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150615/6de7b490/attachment.jpe>;
Brian Hoffman [ARCHIVE] /
npub1nq…lnwve
2023-06-07 15:38:12
in reply to nevent1q…9p6l
Author Public Key
npub1nqeart5fmxjzj4tejkp7fckp0qa4hw3gpha6espxudum2qlvvrhqvlnwvePublished at
2023-06-07 15:38:12Event JSON
{
"id": "b46428a979ec645cd286b027696c65b00f4565ec5dc8a02f58e3d2f25a42c137",
"pubkey": "9833d1ae89d9a42955799583e4e2c1783b5bba280dfbacc026e379b503ec60ee",
"created_at": 1686152292,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"c55960f842472012dd9d15b2051fcbd70eb3de46e90355da852eabf498d858a6",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"784895df0b0653aa325233d116a40f881af71e18e67fa53079ae44567db4a63a",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"90e354735490405f79f9b984e7c55f86e47124d858f049a26769ea53ee81e8d8"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-06-15\n📝 Original message:Who is actually planning to move to Bitcoin-XT if this happens? \n\nJust Gavin and Mike?\n\n\n\n\u003e On Jun 15, 2015, at 6:17 PM, Faiz Khan \u003cfaizkhan00 at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e I'm quite puzzled by the response myself, it doesn't seem to address some of the (more serious) concerns that Adam put out, the most important question that was asked being the one regarding personal ownership of the proposed fork:\n\u003e \n\u003e \"How do you plan to deal with security \u0026 incident response for the duration you describe where you will have control while you are deploying the unilateral hard-fork and being in sole maintainership control?\"\n\u003e \n\u003e I do genuinely hope that whomever (now and future) wishes to fork the protocol reconsider first whether they are truly ready to test/flex their reputation/skills/resources in this way... Intuitively, to me it seems counterproductive, and I don't fully believe it is within a single developer's talents to manage the process start-to-finish (as it is non-trivial to hard-fork successfully, others have rehashed this in other threads)... \n\u003e \n\u003e That being said I think it appropriate if Adam's questions were responded in-line when Mike is feeling up to it. I think that the answers are important for the community to hear when such a drastic change is being espoused. \n\u003e \n\u003e Faiz\n\u003e \n\u003e\u003e On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Bryan Bishop \u003ckanzure at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\u003e On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Mike Hearn \u003cmike at plan99.net\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Re: anyone who agrees with noted non-programmers Mike\u0026Gavin must be non-technical, stupid, uninformed, etc .... OK, go ahead and show them the error of their ways. Anyone can write blogs.\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e I worry that if this is the level of care you take with reading and (mis)interpreting Adam's messages, that you might not be taking extreme care with evaluating consensus changes, even while tired or sleeping. I encourage you to evaluate both messages and source code more carefully, especially in the world of bitcoin. However, this goes for everyone and not just you. Specifically, when Adam mentioned your conversations with non-technical people, he did not mean \"Mike has talked with people who have possibly not made pull requests to Bitcoin Core, so therefore Mike is a non-programmer\". Communication is difficult and I can understand that, but we really have to be more careful when evaluating each other's messages; technical miscommunication can be catastrophic in this context. On the topic of whether you are a programmer, I suspect that ever since you built CIA.vc we have all known you're a programmer, Mike.\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e - Bryan\n\u003e\u003e http://heybryan.org/\n\u003e\u003e 1 512 203 0507\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e -- \n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e My regards,\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e Faiz Khan\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150615/6de7b490/attachment.html\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: image1.JPG\nType: image/jpeg\nSize: 22107 bytes\nDesc: not available\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150615/6de7b490/attachment.jpe\u003e",
"sig": "5b6fa7ba71b49c063b44461238253f02b373c16ac3288af3581681d38fffb1ad9be8b425a16775fe1a6879471f914e6fccd14aa91e93e286fb56cd79b2db395a"
}