š
Original date posted:2015-09-02
š Original message:On 09/01/2015 03:29 PM, Wladimir J. van der Laan wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 01:55:43PM -0500, Justus Ranvier via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>
>> * They should own their bitcoins, meaning that they retain exclusive
>> control over their balances. Even more precisely, the network must
>> always honour the conditions of the scripts associated with unspent outputs.
>>
>> * Their fraction of the Bitcoin ledger must not be diluted.
>>
>> * When they decide to spend their coins, they will be able to do so
>> without requiring permission from a third party.
>
> All of these properties are contingent on the system being decentralized.
That is not true, unless you are using a definition of the word
"decentralized" which is so broad as to convey no information whatsoever.
Saying that Bitcoin's security depends on decentralization is like
saying that a bridge's structural integrity depends on good materials.
Statements like that convey zero relevant information. Potential users
of a bridge want to know about the maximum working load of the bridge,
and under which conditions it is safe to use. At what wind speed should
the bridge be closed? Is it ok to keep using it after a magnitude 4
earthquake, or should it be closed for inspection?
Repeatedly asserting that bridges need to be made of good materials as
an alternative to answering those kinds of questions would be easily
recognized as useless in that context, but for some reason people seem
to accept it in this one.
--
Justus Ranvier
Open Bitcoin Privacy Project
http://www.openbitcoinprivacyproject.org/
justus at openbitcoinprivacyproject.org
E7AD 8215 8497 3673 6D9E 61C4 2A5F DA70 EAD9 E623
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0xEAD9E623.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 18381 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150902/d0a332af/attachment.bin>;
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150902/d0a332af/attachment.sig>;
Justus Ranvier [ARCHIVE] /
npub1k2ā¦9qd6m
2023-06-07 17:38:48
in reply to nevent1qā¦6784
Author Public Key
npub1k2eekmevs6gg60df75qpjw4a2atmy89vx28c8zqq5jxy64tuzrws39qd6mPublished at
2023-06-07 17:38:48Event JSON
{
"id": "b2614f93ef02ae28c81e4b294e49520e849d7f4c8a6160d85e48392dbe03a074",
"pubkey": "b2b39b6f2c86908d3da9f500193abd5757b21cac328f838800a48c4d557c10dd",
"created_at": 1686159528,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"111acac704f23dc3e472de75beb22b999735d7f4efd059a37ae0454e185bc534",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"8569199e10b72b7efcb89d7548bfa8d8871124d1068f0201129bef59595794aa",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5c0b7fca51fd4830b4d9f840de063faebeeabd3bb5dd118de9cdf50a6feaaf98"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2015-09-02\nš Original message:On 09/01/2015 03:29 PM, Wladimir J. van der Laan wrote:\n\u003e On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 01:55:43PM -0500, Justus Ranvier via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e\u003e * They should own their bitcoins, meaning that they retain exclusive\n\u003e\u003e control over their balances. Even more precisely, the network must\n\u003e\u003e always honour the conditions of the scripts associated with unspent outputs.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e * Their fraction of the Bitcoin ledger must not be diluted.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e * When they decide to spend their coins, they will be able to do so\n\u003e\u003e without requiring permission from a third party.\n\u003e \n\u003e All of these properties are contingent on the system being decentralized.\n\nThat is not true, unless you are using a definition of the word\n\"decentralized\" which is so broad as to convey no information whatsoever.\n\nSaying that Bitcoin's security depends on decentralization is like\nsaying that a bridge's structural integrity depends on good materials.\n\nStatements like that convey zero relevant information. Potential users\nof a bridge want to know about the maximum working load of the bridge,\nand under which conditions it is safe to use. At what wind speed should\nthe bridge be closed? Is it ok to keep using it after a magnitude 4\nearthquake, or should it be closed for inspection?\n\nRepeatedly asserting that bridges need to be made of good materials as\nan alternative to answering those kinds of questions would be easily\nrecognized as useless in that context, but for some reason people seem\nto accept it in this one.\n\n\n-- \nJustus Ranvier\nOpen Bitcoin Privacy Project\nhttp://www.openbitcoinprivacyproject.org/\njustus at openbitcoinprivacyproject.org\nE7AD 8215 8497 3673 6D9E 61C4 2A5F DA70 EAD9 E623\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: 0xEAD9E623.asc\nType: application/pgp-keys\nSize: 18381 bytes\nDesc: not available\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150902/d0a332af/attachment.bin\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 801 bytes\nDesc: OpenPGP digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150902/d0a332af/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "51926ef521b1e54f058a109ec1bfd011a5b30d7a9a1b69352efcd4be3f7b3227712fb801c749a054d29a357758eef2bdbb76db25a77eb40c369d0f859bdfd09e"
}