š
Original date posted:2015-06-26
š Original message:If Bitcoin is a $3bn project where stakeholder interests are to be
safeguarded, or if Bitcoin is to be compared to a civil engineering
project where life and death is at stake, it seems only logical that a
well-defined and well-documented process be introduced to properly
evaluate proposed changes. Although too late for the block size debate,
it seems odd that discussion of such a process is often dismissed out of
hand.
To maintain the current approach of supermajority consensus, based
around ingrained wisdom, personal preference and unwritten rules would
suggest that Bitcoin is still an experiment, in which case perhaps any
decision regarding the block size should be based upon technical merit
alone rather than economic interest.
--Simon
> You're the one proposing a change here; we're evaluating the safety of
that change.
> In civil engineering we have enough experience with disasters to know
> that you can't give into political pressure to do potentially dangerous
> things until the consequences are well understood; hopefully we'll learn
> that in the consensus cryptography space before a big disaster rather
> than after.
Simon Liu [ARCHIVE] /
npub1a3ā¦r6s85
2023-06-07 15:39:47
in reply to nevent1qā¦2gau
Author Public Key
npub1a3zpmn53lhv8jv7vjg3daletu2e6e9ce88737ga2r7dkr7yc7dss7r6s85Published at
2023-06-07 15:39:47Event JSON
{
"id": "223c939eb4f19187b48774ea5102e60182bf3f14052670af24bafae398730039",
"pubkey": "ec441dce91fdd87933cc9222deff2be2b3ac971939fd1f23aa1f9b61f898f361",
"created_at": 1686152387,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"1936c15d372dc9e8a0eaf645dcff207375e90675dbebfadcf82370abc654737d",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"976676cb2f01fa0020346ba8046efc4fd6eac9f165cda57c010d1ff00d5a418f",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"daa2fc676a25e3b5b45644540bcbd1e1168b111427cd0e3cf19c56194fb231aa"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2015-06-26\nš Original message:If Bitcoin is a $3bn project where stakeholder interests are to be\nsafeguarded, or if Bitcoin is to be compared to a civil engineering\nproject where life and death is at stake, it seems only logical that a\nwell-defined and well-documented process be introduced to properly\nevaluate proposed changes. Although too late for the block size debate,\nit seems odd that discussion of such a process is often dismissed out of\nhand.\n\nTo maintain the current approach of supermajority consensus, based\naround ingrained wisdom, personal preference and unwritten rules would\nsuggest that Bitcoin is still an experiment, in which case perhaps any\ndecision regarding the block size should be based upon technical merit\nalone rather than economic interest.\n\n--Simon\n\n\u003e You're the one proposing a change here; we're evaluating the safety of\nthat change.\n\n\u003e In civil engineering we have enough experience with disasters to know\n\u003e that you can't give into political pressure to do potentially dangerous\n\u003e things until the consequences are well understood; hopefully we'll learn\n\u003e that in the consensus cryptography space before a big disaster rather\n\u003e than after.",
"sig": "852ebcea197b124e3c1942eac891f89c096034f782945a32064dc89ebfa2e25db0fac7c42192fe8f04e71a77efe7b696ccd770f277952265385bc49c105dd635"
}