MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <F5F02B94-E094-4C16-80B6-8B0876E423E4@toom.im>
References: <CAAS2fgR84898xD0nyq7ykJnB7qkdoCJYnFg6z5WZEUu0+-=mMA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20170406023123.GA1071@savin.petertodd.org>
	<CA+KqGkqSxeAUZFVFqM_QkEWcGFHgZXwGuOE==7HpXp1+D_Tj3Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<20170406024910.GA1271@savin.petertodd.org>
	<CAFVRnyrqiNY_JOqhv2ysm2WsBMYsU3tTAASAtHzMbA68_9Yx8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<F5F02B94-E094-4C16-80B6-8B0876E423E4@toom.im>
From: Alex Mizrahi <alex.mizrahi@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 20:04:29 +0300
Message-ID: <CAE28kURxDezNJ9-SG_iogFZ45G0-2etBvo6oOkoeRgW8C330Eg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114a7d6a96a1a7054c8280f9
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Inhibiting a covert attack on the
 Bitcoin POW function
Precedence: list

--001a114a7d6a96a1a7054c8280f9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

> Ethically, this situation has some similarities to the DAO fork.


There are no similarities.

The DAO fork was against the principles of cryptocurrencies: a change of
the ledger done in violation of pre-agreed rules. The whole point of
cryptocurrency is to avoid shit like that. (E.g. a central banker changing
ledger as he wants.)

Greg's proposal is in line with the principles of cryptocurrencies:
PoW-based cryptocurrency can work only if there is a competition between
miners, which requires all miners to have equal access to the technology.

The notion that Bitmain is entitled to future profits is completely
ridiculous. Every investment has a risk, and doing unusual stuff which
boosts your profits is associated with increased risk. Developers just need
to make sure all miners are on equal grounds, as that's the whole point of
the protocol. If Bitmain loses their profits because of that it's really
just Bitmain's problem.

--001a114a7d6a96a1a7054c8280f9
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><br>=
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Ethically, this situation has some similarit=
ies to the DAO fork.=C2=A0</blockquote><div><br></div><div>There are no sim=
ilarities.</div><div><br></div><div>The DAO fork was against the principles=
 of cryptocurrencies: a change of the ledger done in violation of pre-agree=
d rules. The whole point of cryptocurrency is to avoid shit like that. (E.g=
. a central banker changing ledger as he wants.)</div><div><br></div><div>G=
reg&#39;s proposal is in line with the principles of cryptocurrencies: PoW-=
based cryptocurrency can work only if there is a competition between miners=
, which requires all miners to have equal access to the technology.</div><d=
iv><br></div><div>The notion that Bitmain is entitled to future profits is =
completely ridiculous. Every investment has a risk, and doing unusual stuff=
 which boosts your profits is associated with increased risk. Developers ju=
st need to make sure all miners are on equal grounds, as that&#39;s the who=
le point of the protocol. If Bitmain loses their profits because of that it=
&#39;s really just Bitmain&#39;s problem.</div></div></div></div>

--001a114a7d6a96a1a7054c8280f9--