Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 74.125.82.181 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=74.125.82.181; envelope-from=natanael.l@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-we0-f181.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <54DD046B.3070507@riseup.net>
References: <20150212064719.GA6563@savin.petertodd.org>
	<CANEZrP2uVT_UqJbzyQcEbiS78T68Jj2cH7OGXv5QtYiCwArDdA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE28kUQ87jWhq1p6RK1eKEuEP1ERxN_P2SS0=YsFEGAqRyMPLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP2H2T2QFZceCc=YzwwiApJy7kY7FN0LoAZODGbW12SYsw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE28kURa8g3YTPi-GHKAt4v0csxXe=QhGhV3aQcDZGSr=Lb7RQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP2hAUsRfeXUo-DLiiRmG5uJcwFuP4=o1S6Fb7ts5Ud=bw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADJgMztrzMh8=Y6SD-JV1hpTTbGB8Y2u=59bQhGtF6h3+Ei_Ew@mail.gmail.com>
	<356E7F6E-300A-4127-9885-2183FB1DE447@gmail.com>
	<54DCECE4.3020802@riseup.net>
	<CAJfRnm4OBEJPW-6CiY5fQ1kUYppDnTtZfLF_YpBEaB8ovzx9og@mail.gmail.com>
	<54DCFBB5.3080202@gmail.com> <54DD003E.2060508@riseup.net>
	<CAJfRnm5d2WcZw3eRjN-cLajwTM0iF_o7OCPc+dkv+s-p3e9nLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<54DD046B.3070507@riseup.net>
From: Natanael <natanael.l@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 21:02:10 +0100
Message-ID: <CAAt2M18bXK_a3JVmnwC0rrVXwiz7iycgCnBYe1ALYXEab-V=Sw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Justus Ranvier <justusranvier@riseup.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] replace-by-fee v0.10.0rc4
Precedence: list

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 8:52 PM, Justus Ranvier
<justusranvier@riseup.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 02/12/2015 07:47 PM, Allen Piscitello wrote:
>> Nothing will stop that.  Bitcoin needs to deal with those issues,
>> not stick our heads in the sand and pretend they don't exist out of
>> benevolence. This isn't a pet solution, but the rules of the
>> protocol and what is realistically possible given the nature of
>> distributed consensus.  Relying on altruism is a recipe for
>> failure.
>
> If there's a risk of fire burning down wooden buildings, pass out fire
> extinguishers and smoke detectors, not matches.
>
> The latter makes one an arsonist.

Controlled fires is a valid tactic when necessary to reduce harm. It
is frequently used in areas with periods of extreme heat including
Australia. By burning off grids, you isolate the majority of flammable
matter into "islands". An accident fire would cause much more damage.

Placing yourself in the way of the fire and asking them to find
another solution isn't that bright. It is only a matter of time until
a fire starts, controlled or not! If you want another solution, go
figure one out yourself!

More to the point, it is unreasonable to knowingly expose yourself to
risk of harm and blame everybody else who isn't making your life
easier without you having to change anything. If the majority decides
that the best option to reduce harm for everybody requires that you
move out of the way and find another way to do things, you're better
off moving.

Telling people it is fine to keep being careless when there's a fire
hazard is "the real crime", because that would cause more harm than
what those who try to get the system changed does.