📅 Original date posted:2015-06-18
📝 Original message:I've got a few thoughts on this, but they don't really attach well to a
single message, so starting a fresh message in the same thread. I'm
going to try being brief.
There's a lot of talk about not forking. Sorry, but they're going to
happen, planned and unplanned. Even if no intentional forks occur from
here on, I hope it's obvious that there will be further accidental forks
(at least unless and until someone prepares a formal proof of a Bitcoin
wallet). We need to be more comfortable with that, and plan ahead.
Education is key here, a lot of people don't understand what a fork is,
how it will affect them, how to recognise a fork or how to recover. I'll
dig out what materials I've written already and try making them more
widely available, as a start.
On whether code forks are a solution to disagreements - I'm not quite
sure what people expect will happen where a group believes there is an
existential threat to Bitcoin and they cannot get Bitcoin Core updated.
I may disagree with Mike & Gavin on timescale, but I do believe there's
a likelihood inaction will kill Bitcoin, and in that context I see the
rational choice as taking the perceived smaller risk of a fork killing
Bitcoin. BIP100 appears to be making progress, however, right now I
think the best option is pursuing it towards something that can be
agreed on by all. I would also happily go with an 8MB block size even if
just to buy us (IMHO a lot) more time.
Lastly, there seems to be a number of people who believe inaction
through apathy is fine. I respect those who form considered opinions and
tell me why they believe 1MB is fine, but I do ask that people either
put the effort in to help make decisions, or delegate to someone else.
Decentralised does not mean there's no decision making, it means we're
all decision makers, and frankly I think there's effectively negligence
in that capacity right now. I'd also point out this ongoing discussion
is a huge time sink to a number of people who could be making much more
useful contributions, and that again going in circles endlessly
discussing in the name of decentralisation isn't positive.
I have failed at being brief, apologies.
Ross
Ross Nicoll [ARCHIVE] /
npub10p…pfaef
2023-06-07 15:38:34
in reply to nevent1q…qfl9
Author Public Key
npub10plv6jx6pktpp5ezldnus6kj8ffg045g2kdjl78w23njrlveqy5s3pfaefSeen on
wss://relay.nostr.bandPublished at
2023-06-07 15:38:34Event JSON
{
"id": "e4950bc0ae45c36ad576a917912290526a66c5f80322711ed62cb47f60d50c94",
"pubkey": "787ecd48da0d9610d322fb67c86ad23a5287d688559b2ff8ee546721fd990129",
"created_at": 1686152314,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"23c1bb2f25b9e7356b48aa2a86751c4f26fb3977b440917a1cb3512c200b0b2f",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"3b0a45df8bc18d0c950866ed44c74ce04224f521cca47f5dfe42e175bd230de4",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"498a711971f8a0194289aee037a4c481a99e731b5151724064973cc0e0b27c84"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-06-18\n📝 Original message:I've got a few thoughts on this, but they don't really attach well to a \nsingle message, so starting a fresh message in the same thread. I'm \ngoing to try being brief.\n\nThere's a lot of talk about not forking. Sorry, but they're going to \nhappen, planned and unplanned. Even if no intentional forks occur from \nhere on, I hope it's obvious that there will be further accidental forks \n(at least unless and until someone prepares a formal proof of a Bitcoin \nwallet). We need to be more comfortable with that, and plan ahead. \nEducation is key here, a lot of people don't understand what a fork is, \nhow it will affect them, how to recognise a fork or how to recover. I'll \ndig out what materials I've written already and try making them more \nwidely available, as a start.\n\nOn whether code forks are a solution to disagreements - I'm not quite \nsure what people expect will happen where a group believes there is an \nexistential threat to Bitcoin and they cannot get Bitcoin Core updated. \nI may disagree with Mike \u0026 Gavin on timescale, but I do believe there's \na likelihood inaction will kill Bitcoin, and in that context I see the \nrational choice as taking the perceived smaller risk of a fork killing \nBitcoin. BIP100 appears to be making progress, however, right now I \nthink the best option is pursuing it towards something that can be \nagreed on by all. I would also happily go with an 8MB block size even if \njust to buy us (IMHO a lot) more time.\n\nLastly, there seems to be a number of people who believe inaction \nthrough apathy is fine. I respect those who form considered opinions and \ntell me why they believe 1MB is fine, but I do ask that people either \nput the effort in to help make decisions, or delegate to someone else. \nDecentralised does not mean there's no decision making, it means we're \nall decision makers, and frankly I think there's effectively negligence \nin that capacity right now. I'd also point out this ongoing discussion \nis a huge time sink to a number of people who could be making much more \nuseful contributions, and that again going in circles endlessly \ndiscussing in the name of decentralisation isn't positive.\n\nI have failed at being brief, apologies.\n\nRoss",
"sig": "18f358a038e24ffb09688469863e274ea516f10b3130a19acd66bb3b52442c1d1f92f8f5f392af02e82a24d79cff2bf3c39133a9e9e28022f5eb2a1c2938b56d"
}