Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
	designates 62.13.148.111 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=62.13.148.111; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
	helo=outmail148111.authsmtp.net; 
Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 09:02:40 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Message-ID: <20150507130240.GA16681@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <554A91BE.6060105@bluematt.me>
	<CANEZrP3wGWHdz+ut6pvke5TJJsc1rTFt8sn2KziX35oL5LAsyg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDpDvk2VsQ+mJ-BoeBKmvu9jBXNujZEFKuCStRNjFL6VOA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP2zAGCCBhNa4=9yw+A_Dn5o4SQXoPTE_qcJzZ1dFuF2tw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="r5Pyd7+fXNt84Ff3"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP2zAGCCBhNa4=9yw+A_Dn5o4SQXoPTE_qcJzZ1dFuF2tw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase
Precedence: list


--r5Pyd7+fXNt84Ff3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 01:29:44PM +0200, Mike Hearn wrote:
> What if Gavin popped up right now and said he disagreed with every current
> proposal, he disagreed with side chains too, and there would be no
> consensus on any of them until the block size limit was raised.
>=20
> Would you say, oh, OK, guess that's it then. There's no consensus so might
> as well scrap all those proposals, as they'll never happen anyway. Bye bye
> side chains whitepaper.

If Gavin had good points to make, he'd probably eventually change
everyone's mind.

But if he fails to do that at some point he'll just get ignored and for
all practical purposes won't be considered part of the consensus. Not
unlike how if someone suggested we power the blockchain via perpetual
motion machines they'd be ignored. Bitcoin is after all a decentralized
system so all power over the development process is held only by social
consent and respect.

At that point I'd suggest Gavin fork the project and go to the next
level of consensus gathering, the community at large; I'm noticing this
is exactly what you and Gavin are doing.

Speaking of, are you and Gavin still thinking about forking Bitcoin
Core? If so I wish you the best of luck.

Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 at 2:42 PM
=46rom: "Mike Hearn" <mike@plan99.net>
To: "Satoshi Nakamoto" <satoshin@gmx.com>
Subject: Thinking about a fork
I don't expect a reply, just getting some thoughts off my chest. Writing th=
em down helps.

Forking Bitcoin-Qt/Core has been coming up more and more often lately in co=
nversation (up from zero not that long ago). Gavin even suggested me and hi=
m fork it ... I pointed out that maintainers don't normally fork their own =
software :)

The problem is that the current community of developers has largely lost in=
terest in supporting SPV wallets. Indeed any protocol change that might mea=
n any risk at all, for anyone, is now being bogged down in endless circular=
 arguments that never end. The Bitcoin developers have effectively become t=
he new financial regulators: restricting options within their jurisdiction =
with "someone might do something risky" being used as the justification.

If alternative low-risk protocols were always easily available this would b=
e no problem, but often they require enormous coding and deployment effort =
or just don't exist at all. Yet, wallets must move forward. If we carry on =
as now there simply won't be any usable decentralised wallets left and Bitc=
oin will have become an energy-wasting backbone for a bunch of banks and pa=
yment processors. That's so far from your original vision, it's sad.

I know you won't return and that's wise, but sometimes I wish you'd left a =
clearer design manifesto before handing the reigns over to Gavin, who is in=
creasingly burned out due to all the arguments (as am I).

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2g9c0j/satoshi_email_leak/

--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
0000000000000000066f25b3196b51d30df5c1678fc206fdf55b65dd6e593b05

--r5Pyd7+fXNt84Ff3
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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==
=yWzF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--r5Pyd7+fXNt84Ff3--