1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
|
Return-Path: <daggerhashimoto@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2BED67D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 17 Aug 2015 19:02:20 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-qg0-f51.google.com (mail-qg0-f51.google.com
[209.85.192.51])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FC1FEE
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 17 Aug 2015 19:02:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by qgeg42 with SMTP id g42so101413382qge.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:02:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=R7R1L0pTz8KhW96EQTxJCnbk8ML2wHPSSdKREfAP1h0=;
b=wizzy9ttP8pZooV+WqVHAO+PYebt5+fabPP0ZUfjVkF5D1PwBbxOWmQfMo5ucNcOm6
fslj1ybA6qHC9zXM5tfY/KPvYz06f5thKOmfePWabfRLxIyzCvQ1V6ceO1vBn589x6dn
JMvp25zK0lBnde2pR+FTvkoWEiJeEiaxfzSqe6f8a6Bv0qh4cOw7Z2rnntgeS3PZN/Q3
MoYXhW+d2Xb++dWRSw2idaGQ7qlAzt0WoHhGn9JWegfiKK8Sexm/ZUdwEx1ytHCZJmHD
0dyFHRST5B8P2Zrjta3Uvm0AvusptHPYLmdVRlPxDwzCwvJPDcnLX/rF4hXdOEelEd/O
oSDQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.140.196.10 with SMTP id r10mr5392252qha.29.1439838138574;
Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:02:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.55.148.4 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:02:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6EC9DDF352DC4838AE9B088AB372428A25E1F42A@DS04>
References: <6EC9DDF352DC4838AE9B088AB372428A25E1F42A@DS04>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:02:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CAH2CxRBwG6-cS9N4LYmXe4sjnB7uyyex6bEysP_4vH4BKH9u_A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Anon Moto <daggerhashimoto@gmail.com>
To: satoshi@vistomail.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113bc3d8c8cabc051d867024
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin XT Fork
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 19:02:20 -0000
--001a113bc3d8c8cabc051d867024
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Satoshi,
As much as I want to believe this is you it's very difficult to ignore the
fact that Vistomail could have been hacked and I'm currently speaking to a
troll.
Can you copy and paste what you wrote above, to
http://p2pfoundation.ning.com as well, like how you did during the Dorian
fiasco?
Much appreciated.
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Satoshi Nakamoto via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> I have been following the recent block size debates through the mailing
> list. I had hoped the debate would resolve and that a fork proposal would
> achieve widespread consensus. However with the formal release of Bitcoin
> XT 0.11A, this looks unlikely to happen, and so I am forced to share my
> concerns about this very dangerous fork.
>
> The developers of this pretender-Bitcoin claim to be following my original
> vision, but nothing could be further from the truth. When I designed
> Bitcoin, I designed it in such a way as to make future modifications to the
> consensus rules difficult without near unanimous agreement. Bitcoin was
> designed to be protected from the influence of charismatic leaders, even if
> their name is Gavin Andresen, Barack Obama, or Satoshi Nakamoto. Nearly
> everyone has to agree on a change, and they have to do it without being
> forced or pressured into it. By doing a fork in this way, these developers
> are violating the "original vision" they claim to honour.
>
> They use my old writings to make claims about what Bitcoin was supposed to
> be. However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since that time, and new
> knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of my early opinions. For
> example I didn't anticipate pooled mining and its effects on the security
> of the network. Making Bitcoin a competitive monetary system while also
> preserving its security properties is not a trivial problem, and we should
> take more time to come up with a robust solution. I suspect we need a
> better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on
> altruism.
>
> If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what
> "Bitcoin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and through the
> use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice but to declare Bitcoin
> a failed project. Bitcoin was meant to be both technically and socially
> robust. This present situation has been very disappointing to watch unfold.
>
> Satoshi Nakamoto
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
--001a113bc3d8c8cabc051d867024
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div>Satoshi, <br><br></div>As much as I want to=
believe this is you it's very difficult to ignore the fact that Vistom=
ail could have been hacked and I'm currently speaking to a troll. <br><=
/div>Can you copy and paste what you wrote above, to <a href=3D"http://p2pf=
oundation.ning.com">http://p2pfoundation.ning.com</a> as well, like how you=
did during the Dorian fiasco? <br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div>Much=
appreciated. <br><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gm=
ail_quote">On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Satoshi Nakamoto via bitcoin-d=
ev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundatio=
n.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></spa=
n> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;b=
order-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I have been following the recen=
t block size debates through the mailing list.=C2=A0 I had hoped the debate=
would resolve and that a fork proposal would achieve widespread consensus.=
=C2=A0 However with the formal release of Bitcoin XT 0.11A, this looks unli=
kely to happen, and so I am forced to share my concerns about this very dan=
gerous fork.<br>
<br>
The developers of this pretender-Bitcoin claim to be following my original =
vision, but nothing could be further from the truth.=C2=A0 When I designed =
Bitcoin, I designed it in such a way as to make future modifications to the=
consensus rules difficult without near unanimous agreement.=C2=A0 Bitcoin =
was designed to be protected from the influence of charismatic leaders, eve=
n if their name is Gavin Andresen, Barack Obama, or Satoshi Nakamoto.=C2=A0=
Nearly everyone has to agree on a change, and they have to do it without b=
eing forced or pressured into it.=C2=A0 By doing a fork in this way, these =
developers are violating the "original vision" they claim to hono=
ur.<br>
<br>
They use my old writings to make claims about what Bitcoin was supposed to =
be.=C2=A0 However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since that time, and=
new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of my early opinions.=
=C2=A0 For example I didn't anticipate pooled mining and its effects on=
the security of the network.=C2=A0 Making Bitcoin a competitive monetary s=
ystem while also preserving its security properties is not a trivial proble=
m, and we should take more time to come up with a robust solution.=C2=A0 I =
suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relyin=
g solely on altruism.<br>
<br>
If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what "Bit=
coin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and through th=
e use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice but to declare Bitcoi=
n a failed project.=C2=A0 Bitcoin was meant to be both technically and soci=
ally robust.=C2=A0 This present situation has been very disappointing to wa=
tch unfold.<br>
<br>
Satoshi Nakamoto<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
--001a113bc3d8c8cabc051d867024--
|
