📅 Original date posted:2015-09-01
📝 Original message:On 2015-09-01 18:37, Eric Voskuil wrote:
> Whether intended or otherwise this is an attack on the idea of
> decentralized bitcoin development. The option to fork or roll your own
> is open source, not decentralization. Decentralization requires
> *actually doing so*. One step down that path, even for a fork, is a
> major commitment.
>
> Common consensus check code is now available in several bitcoin
> implementations. The claim that this is outrageously difficult is
> misleading. It's just engineering work that needs to get done if
> Bitcoin
> is to survive.
>
There's no requirement for there to be multiple interpretations of the
consensus code, this is why libbitcoinconsensus exists. Why do you
think Bitcoins survival is predicated on reimplementation?
> These are issues that affect the satoshi client as much as other
> implementations, and therefore don't support your premise.
>
I'm aware that these problems apply to Bitcoin Core.
Monarch [ARCHIVE] /
npub165…sale4
2023-06-07 17:38:47
in reply to nevent1q…hte0
Author Public Key
npub165cz97uf69xr6av492gc8pq6t4cjnh4fxlzplv7g68cvx3jwqgrsasale4Published at
2023-06-07 17:38:47Event JSON
{
"id": "61626d6cf78b2a7cdada01e808468e585211bb807fb2851a00dd16978385d428",
"pubkey": "d53022fb89d14c3d75952a9183841a5d7129dea937c41fb3c8d1f0c3464e0207",
"created_at": 1686159527,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"111acac704f23dc3e472de75beb22b999735d7f4efd059a37ae0454e185bc534",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"6f8e64c9e7b9c3e010907129156de4a7a0c87d87eea64a6549cfcdc043483ec3",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"82205f272f995d9be742779a3c19a2ae08522ca14824c3a3b01525fb5459161e"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-09-01\n📝 Original message:On 2015-09-01 18:37, Eric Voskuil wrote:\n\u003e Whether intended or otherwise this is an attack on the idea of\n\u003e decentralized bitcoin development. The option to fork or roll your own\n\u003e is open source, not decentralization. Decentralization requires\n\u003e *actually doing so*. One step down that path, even for a fork, is a\n\u003e major commitment.\n\u003e \n\u003e Common consensus check code is now available in several bitcoin\n\u003e implementations. The claim that this is outrageously difficult is\n\u003e misleading. It's just engineering work that needs to get done if \n\u003e Bitcoin\n\u003e is to survive.\n\u003e \n\nThere's no requirement for there to be multiple interpretations of the\nconsensus code, this is why libbitcoinconsensus exists. Why do you\nthink Bitcoins survival is predicated on reimplementation?\n\n\n\u003e These are issues that affect the satoshi client as much as other\n\u003e implementations, and therefore don't support your premise.\n\u003e \n\nI'm aware that these problems apply to Bitcoin Core.",
"sig": "df555644a4eb896b5cd45ada416403676ee6f99e7c3ef14bd750be0d56458884246f26e8e4b3a74a6ed3d550d01fefa562e11586bc33d3557c329ea2ef3b26b8"
}