From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
	Justus Ranvier <justus@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 00:33:18 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.1.9-gentoo-r1; KDE/4.14.8; x86_64; ; )
References: <CABsx9T0Evf3B_NtmdKxc_M1xRQh-jSC4JzTHCx8Ez9RzCypvMg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE-z3OWJ8YvXU5aGqgs9VJnW99va=0=FoObmpHS3irg4Kh6wrQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<5636ACFF.5040908@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org>
In-Reply-To: <5636ACFF.5040908@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201511020033.19291.luke@dashjr.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Compatibility requirements for hard or soft forks
Precedence: list

On Monday, November 02, 2015 12:23:27 AM Justus Ranvier via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> It's a lot easier to justify the position: "nobody has the right to
> change the meaning of someone else's outputs", than it is to justify,
> "some small group of people gets to decide what's standard and what
> isn't, and if you choose to use the network in a valid but nonstandard
> way, that group of people might choose to deny you access to your money
> in the future"

The reality is presently "some small group of people gets to decide how and if 
you can access your money"... and it's getting worse.

> In other words, how close to the shores of "administrators of a virtual
> currency" do Bitcoin developers want to sail?

Bitcoin developers don't make this decision, miners do.

Luke