From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
	Dave Scotese <dscotese@litmocracy.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2019 03:01:00 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 (enterprise35 0.20100827.1168748)
References: <CAPfvXf+JS6ZhXUieWVxiaNa4uhhWwafCk3odMKy5F_yi=XwngA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACiOHGxxqm5Qn8J9u5oDE5Ek5smqB4E4iz4PJOZHpJO5kwP=-A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGLBAhf1NZfT9TunhHAb==mFTfaAacjekQh6Pqn4yBS+90Zw6A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGLBAhf1NZfT9TunhHAb==mFTfaAacjekQh6Pqn4yBS+90Zw6A@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <201904040301.01074.luke@dashjr.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] assumeutxo and UTXO snapshots
Precedence: list

On Wednesday 03 April 2019 21:39:32 Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Luke's comment that it could "lead to users trusting third parties (like
> developers) way too much" is pertinent too, but I think an honest abatement
> of that concern is impossible without teaching everyone C++.

Learning C++ is something within everyone's capability. Even people who do not 
wish to learn it can hire someone to perform review for them.

> "Developers" 
> as an open group (anyone can fork the github repo, find a problem, and make
> an issue) deserve the trust we put in them, and that's because they're
> accountable (any such error found in the repo will have been put there by
> someone). 

No, we are not. We explicitly disclaim any warranty, and do not want your 
trust.

> The same thing goes for making it possible to download (*not 
> just the compiled software*, but) the entire UTXO Set if a commitment of it
> is hardcoded into the software, as James suggests. 

Verifying a UTXO set commitment is impossible short of a real IBD. It's not 
even comparable.

> We all trust 
> "developers" like that, and it's okay.

No, it isn't okay. There are plenty of fiat options if you want a trust-based 
currency. Bitcoin is supposed to be something more than that.

Luke