Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2021 03:02:33 +0000
To: "yanmaani@cock.li" <yanmaani@cock.li>,
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <d-6yONWH6zDSQXl7l6cJR2QsGw_iL-CyTJI16XZ4AkAwAdT65p3JylrIZ4VLbAAFQyfxyaDA3zUhctgiEkJKVQvfhzA-slPmPYdKW1L8M_4=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <3d686c3a100338514c3ebcc264ec24f2@cock.li>
References: <MmT9umZ--3-2@tutanota.de>
 <20211020192054.GA117785@jauntyelephant.191.37.198.vultr.com>
 <CAHiDt8A30DZtvsPnDDdtyVpho-NKKQhbP_4g8d0MGATawWvg_w@mail.gmail.com>
 <MnjA6g0--3-2@tutanota.de> <3d686c3a100338514c3ebcc264ec24f2@cock.li>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Prayank <prayank@tutanota.de>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] bitcoin.org missing bitcoin core version 22.0
Precedence: list

Good morning yanmaani,


> > 3.More people from different countries getting involved in important
> > roles.
>
> Isn't Bitcoin already plenty distributed? Funding people in
> under-represented countries seems to me like a textbook exercise in
> 'box-ticking, but moreover, I'd frankly rather have reasonably well-off
> guys from Western Europe/America who have the financial backbone to not
> worry that much about attacks to their funding, than mercenaries who
> have to follow orders or get fired. Even if they're from West
> Uzbekistan.
>
> (Maybe they need a union?)
>
> > 4.Few anons.
>
> Gonna guess you mean "a few anons," not fewer anons.
>
> Again, problem is money. These days, nobody threatens anyone with
> anything substantive, like murder - the threats all involve cutting off
> some funding. So having anonymous people being funded by non-robust
> sources doesn't really buy you that much, because the weakest link will
> pretty much never be the de-jure, legal freedom of an individual.
>
> Having a system that allows people to fund anonymous people better would
> be interesting, but it has some challenges with trust and so on.

<ZmnSCPxj coughs quietly in GMT+8 timezone>

On the other hand, one can argue that "ZmnSCPxj" at this point is a bonafid=
e name (that happens to once have been simply a random sequence of letters)=
 rather than an anonymous cover.

As to box-ticking: the simple fact of the matter is that smart humans will =
arise everywhere.
It is to the interest of Bitcoin users that more of thhem contribute to the=
 success of Bitcoin.
The alternative by default is that smart people who became smart because th=
ey happened to start out with the disadvantage of having to fight tooth and=
 claw in a bad environment will be quite willing to do anything, including =
attack Bitcoin, just to get out of such a situation.

Regards,
ZmnSCPxj