Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
	designates 62.13.149.113 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=62.13.149.113; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
	helo=outmail149113.authsmtp.com; 
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 03:49:41 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@250bpm.com>
Message-ID: <20131022074941.GB3452@savin>
References: <791a727f-2188-4848-bd77-ea733c8c5c2c@me.com>
	<201310211947.59640.luke@dashjr.org> <52661DB7.7040805@250bpm.com>
	<FAE2A544-9295-4087-96DE-D4602D109CBD@me.com>
	<CAAS2fgS2f=gYRSr1n2DzK7CUH3xG3J2JMnDreCKBoCcJcpGLxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<52662AA1.5050509@250bpm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="+pHx0qQiF2pBVqBT"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <52662AA1.5050509@250bpm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal
Precedence: list


--+pHx0qQiF2pBVqBT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 09:34:57AM +0200, Martin Sustrik wrote:
> On 22/10/13 09:03, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:59 PM, Jean-Paul Kogelman
> > <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com> wrote:
> >> Have you seen: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification ?
> >
> > Take care, the information in the wiki is woefully incomplete.
>=20
> Imagine myself, with no prior knowledge of Bitcoin looking at the=20
> document. It starts with "Hashes". What hashes? No idea what's going on.=
=20
> Etc.
>=20
> Now compare that to a well written RFC. It starts with introduction,=20
> description of the problem, explains the conceptual model of the=20
> solution, then dives into the details. There's also Security=20
> Considerations part in every RFC that is pretty relevant for Bitcoin.
>=20
> As I said, I am willing to help with writing such document, it would be=
=20
> a nice way of learning the stuff, however, help from core devs, such as=
=20
> answering question that may arise in the process, or reviewing the=20
> document would be needed.

Writing such RFCs is dangerous due to the consensus nature of Bitcoin -
it makes people think the standard is the RFC, rather than the code.

I hear one of the better intros to Bitcoin is the Khan academy videos,
but I've never watched them myself. Once you understand how it works,
start reading source code - the Bitcoin codebase is actually really
simple and readable. However remember that the implications of that
codebase are anything but simple; there's lots of reasons to think
Satoshi himself didn't understand Bitcoin all that well, even by the
time he left the project.

--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000000f155e7a648e84a83589048ae1cacb0c60bfce2437553b6af4

--+pHx0qQiF2pBVqBT
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
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==
=kPNV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--+pHx0qQiF2pBVqBT--