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
|
Return-Path: <gacrux@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14179407
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 23 Jul 2015 08:24:47 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pa0-f51.google.com (mail-pa0-f51.google.com
[209.85.220.51])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 944BF185
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 23 Jul 2015 08:24:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by pabkd10 with SMTP id kd10so81809310pab.2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 23 Jul 2015 01:24:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version
:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:subject:from:date:to
:message-id; bh=pKYVaNFQ3bhWGOa2jYZQl46HVvQI2Hh1y+wX6yWVk10=;
b=hsabfcJMcHOVUb81w4rfgLAO8jma/U6Bx7xRmSs+/fCPAX/4LoXOMEaKSBzhMmXx5p
Qj4w+Sac1ljBa82tgpAagVjdoiV6Xu9do1ar3085sbEmOm93p+/4Yc3qxFHr5qbtJFs9
g4vK5Bmd2SyQ+7Z47NyzjkCm5y6DFHzPXlPCrTIstRR9q0uxdDRstVFUd33LSGrxf4uf
LMdFyACjwZNCMV7d0UKyyDrFSwYimIDmAfUTJ5vBxtAkP3ia9Cfsp8iLSjycGfdo1QWe
WN+uhNE2R3ceuORwHJq9lz6yjHPp5y8iSnigxPNO26bHfZVvSef6sdM+waigTEqQAGHP
m36Q==
X-Received: by 10.70.34.207 with SMTP id b15mr15890918pdj.151.1437639886122;
Thu, 23 Jul 2015 01:24:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.106.142.236] (politkovskaja.torservers.net.
[77.247.181.165])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f1sm7398432pdp.39.2015.07.23.01.24.41
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
Thu, 23 Jul 2015 01:24:45 -0700 (PDT)
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <BA7ACCE1-81B2-4AC1-B6DD-7A856FD27D52@gmail.com>
References: <BA7ACCE1-81B2-4AC1-B6DD-7A856FD27D52@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=UTF-8
From: Gareth Williams <gacrux@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 18:24:27 +1000
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Message-ID: <23CE614B-0E24-4D0F-B081-ABE21C822C4C@gmail.com>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM,
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
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core and hard forks
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: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 08:24:47 -0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
I've seen a lot of talk on this list debating the role of Bitcoin Core and its maintainers WRT consensus, typically focused around whether they can technically force anyone to run their code (of course, they can't.)
I've yet to see the discussion framed in terms of influence and leadership. Which is why I want to highlight:
>I believe it is the responsibility of the maintainers/developers of
>Bitcoin
>Core to create software which helps guarantee the security and
>operation of
>the Bitcoin network
Perhaps s/helps guarantee/promotes/ , but this stands out as an excellent description of Bitcoin Core's relationship to the Bitcoin network.
Defaults are powerful. Users technically /can/ compile and run any code they like, but very few even bother to change configurable settings. They just want a trusted brand ("Bitcoin Core") that does the right thing out of the box. Bitcoin Core and its maintainers play a valuable /leadership/ role for the network. Whether they can force people to run their code is uninteresting -- people trust them.
That trust is well earned, precisely because they have always promoted the operation and security of the network.
In light of this responsibility it seems unreasonable for anyone to expect Core maintainers to promote patches that endanger network consensus (e.g. user configurable consensus parameters.)
Consensus is order of business #1. If we can't all agree to use the same money then the grand experiment is resolved as a failure. Everyone has consensus parameters they'd (strongly) prefer. Somebody needs to heard us all toward using the same ones, sometimes even in the face of very high costs.
- -Gareth
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: APG v1.1.1
iQFABAEBCgAqBQJVsKPgIxxHYXJldGggV2lsbGlhbXMgPGdhY3J1eEBnbWFpbC5j
b20+AAoJEEY5w2E3jkVEZuEIAIKC9jTO33y4YC/cl1mO/+ux9YUqBlFUpuElKjNe
NLUIqPANrMV3nTjUm666Hk3tVHk8IpYLUU1pRuYBAT17d1t/2bFC4CpfpWssF9Nw
YhoYOKKVMvLUR4DRlkyhMD4YxorJ/TGiuEaFD4K/1s5uKf1+7Vj/BTi+SP+AIAIW
gTbn2CA3T4n8WjDYADE0dqcYSqzt2M1fjXB+Ld95JGLun8m+6lDPhFy/o5aGhBk6
5j86SITT9UtyyA6oaV5NNNgumcNBievnVwjTxjaWm8CBJlJ5jNpW65PQGkoSnCgz
TpYt/wZHcdSqBeNHyno9XaEBSm99Ylk3i2Z1dGQwrSsZU0Q=
=0pac
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
