path: root/ef/d09bdfc02b7178fa832393f30b4edb0f609bbc

Return-Path: <elombrozo@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00ADF74
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Mon, 17 Aug 2015 16:55:47 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pa0-f54.google.com (mail-pa0-f54.google.com
	[209.85.220.54])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A18D155
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Mon, 17 Aug 2015 16:55:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by pacgr6 with SMTP id gr6so112176114pac.2
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Mon, 17 Aug 2015 09:55:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
	:message-id:references:to;
	bh=YXzlvsHYXxhIYz8aESFqp8DIDVABfnFduJsDF0ze1YY=;
	b=vqTRVrFOVmEAX3QVokegvZkA3Dswms6wNpbbpmz/vY2SD7fVcYvK9p/NLga3nDSbi2
	fzqklEIkvo8hNcjkO2oOYbvQmK4dmtOL/6OyR59b1mnzE2MtU0sKG2uoffGc3WPBGCgd
	3lMHKoHHihdH8Vl72hGR1H+s0C1rTwTKae8FJw6Al/gW/8PxbIUmpekgtTEOokAfcGsS
	70wxnM/Y5viRAWHvh6i9QNawuf2ODNX3sAO9K0adNsfU2bYKDCv/qAX2BnJunX2CcD1u
	+Nh3ayUsE8AXgFjDSNJf/dmkoxOKcUOkhAFG9BZIwRxvxdD02ALg8S3PkoEA0d4VrKXL
	R1ZQ==
X-Received: by 10.66.65.138 with SMTP id x10mr4325592pas.61.1439830546036;
	Mon, 17 Aug 2015 09:55:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.107] (cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com.
	[76.167.237.202]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
	fj6sm15275128pdb.21.2015.08.17.09.55.45
	(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
	Mon, 17 Aug 2015 09:55:45 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
	boundary="Apple-Mail=_0F291550-39D1-4BF5-81B2-5F9FA0620DAB";
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5
From: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CE3B7411-2863-4D6B-85B0-4F28D4D7F391@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 09:55:43 -0700
Message-Id: <CF039F20-89F1-41E9-97EB-053E7BDF056F@gmail.com>
References: <20150817100918.BD1F343128@smtp.hushmail.com>
	<1439815244.89850.YahooMailBasic@web173102.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
	<20150817133438.DDD4243128@smtp.hushmail.com>
	<CE3B7411-2863-4D6B-85B0-4F28D4D7F391@gmail.com>
To: NxtChg <nxtchg@hush.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
	MIME_QP_LONG_LINE, 
	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] Annoucing Not-BitcoinXT
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 16:55:47 -0000


--Apple-Mail=_0F291550-39D1-4BF5-81B2-5F9FA0620DAB
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="Apple-Mail=_B9B633AD-65C7-4556-8CCA-DF97D6BF0AA2"


--Apple-Mail=_B9B633AD-65C7-4556-8CCA-DF97D6BF0AA2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8

I should add that in the interest of peace and goodwill, I extend an =
offer to both Mike and Gavin to make their grievances heard=E2=80=A6but =
only on the condition that we make a good effort to avoid =
misrepresentation and misreading of the other side=E2=80=99s intentions.

> On Aug 17, 2015, at 9:37 AM, Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>=20
>=20
>> On Aug 17, 2015, at 6:34 AM, NxtChg via bitcoin-dev =
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org =
<mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
>>=20
>> Great, so how about you go tell theymos to stop censoring XT posts =
and banning the other side on /r/Bitcoin?
>>=20
>> Let users decide what Bitcoin is or isn't.
>=20
> FWIW,
>=20
> I don=E2=80=99t think what theymos did is very constructive.I =
understand his position=E2=80=A6but it only hurts the cause, =
unfortunately - the PR battle is not the same thing as a discussion on =
technical merits. He hurts the PR battle and plays into Mike=E2=80=99s =
hand by doing that. The actual underlying issue actually has little to =
do with block size - it has to do with Mike and Gavin feeling that the =
core devs are being obstructionist.
>=20
> Regardless of the technical merits of XT, the fact that we=E2=80=99ve =
never done a hard fork before, not even for things some other devs have =
wanted=E2=80=A6and not due to any malice on anyone=E2=80=99s part but =
because simply that=E2=80=99s just the nature of decentralized consensus =
with well-defined settlement guarantees=E2=80=A6this is the problem - =
Mike and Gavin think they=E2=80=99re somehow special and their fork =
should be pushed while the rest of us resist pushing our own =
controversial pet ideas because we want civility and understand that at =
this stage in Bitcoin=E2=80=99s development trying to fork the =
blockchain over highly divisive issues is counterproductive and =
destructive.
>=20
> But the fact of the matter is that in the PR battle, arguments against =
the fork actually play into Mike=E2=80=99s hand, and that=E2=80=99s the =
problem.
>=20
> The whole block size thing is too nuanced and too easily spun =
simplistically. It=E2=80=99s too easy to spin resistance to bigger =
blocks (even though the resistance is actually much more towards =
untested hardforking mechanisms and serious security concerns) as =
=E2=80=9Cobstructionism=E2=80=9D and it=E2=80=99s too easy to spin =
bigger blocks as =E2=80=9Cscalability=E2=80=9D because most of the =
people can=E2=80=99t tell the fucking difference.
>=20
> The fact is most of the people don=E2=80=99t really understand the =
fundamental issue and are taking sides based on charismatic leadership =
and authority which is actually entirely counter to the spirit of =
decentralized consensus. It=E2=80=99s beyond ironic.
>=20
> If you guys want to win the PR battle, the key is to make it clear =
that you are not obstructionist and are giving everyone equal =
treatment=E2=80=A6Bitcoin was designed such that changing the rules is =
*hard* and this is a feature. Bitcoin simply does not have a reliable =
and tested hard forking mechanism=E2=80=A6and a hard fork for such a =
politically divisive issue will almost certainly lead to a lack of =
cooperation and refusal to work together out of spite. All of us would =
like to be able to process more transactions on the network. It=E2=80=99s =
not a matter of whether we think higher capacity is a bad thing - it=E2=80=
=99s more that some of us are concerned that Bitcoin is not sufficiently =
mature to be able to handle such a schism with so much hostility.
>=20
> Let=E2=80=99s face it, folks - from a PR standpoint, the block size =
issue is irrelevant. Nobody really understands it except for a handful =
of people - I=E2=80=99ve tried to explain it, I=E2=80=99ve even written =
articles about it - but most people just don=E2=80=99t get it. Most =
people don=E2=80=99t really get scalability either - they seem to think =
that scalability is just doing the same thing you=E2=80=99ve always done =
manyfold.
>=20
> Block size is an especially dangerous issue politically because it=E2=80=
=99s one of those that requires deep understanding yet superficially =
sounds really simple. It=E2=80=99s perfect Dunning-Kruger bait.
>=20
> So let=E2=80=99s be a little smarter about this.


--Apple-Mail=_B9B633AD-65C7-4556-8CCA-DF97D6BF0AA2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=utf-8

<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" =
class=3D"">I should add that in the interest of peace and goodwill, I =
extend an offer to both Mike and Gavin to make their grievances =
heard=E2=80=A6but only on the condition that we make a good effort to =
avoid misrepresentation and misreading of the other side=E2=80=99s =
intentions.<div class=3D""><br class=3D""><div><blockquote type=3D"cite" =
class=3D""><div class=3D"">On Aug 17, 2015, at 9:37 AM, Eric Lombrozo =
&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:elombrozo@gmail.com" =
class=3D"">elombrozo@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:</div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=3D""><meta =
http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html charset=3Dutf-8" =
class=3D""><div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: =
space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=3D""><br =
class=3D""><div class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div =
class=3D"">On Aug 17, 2015, at 6:34 AM, NxtChg via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" =
class=3D"">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:</div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=3D""><span =
style=3D"font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; =
font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; =
line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; =
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline =
!important;" class=3D"">Great, so how about you go tell theymos to stop =
censoring XT posts and banning the other side on /r/Bitcoin?</span><br =
style=3D"font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; =
font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; =
line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; =
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=3D""><br style=3D"font-family:=
 Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; =
font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; =
orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: =
none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=3D""><span style=3D"font-family: =
Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; =
font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; =
orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: =
none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline =
!important;" class=3D"">Let users decide what Bitcoin is or =
isn't.</span></div></blockquote></div><br class=3D""><div =
class=3D"">FWIW,</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div =
class=3D""><div class=3D"">I don=E2=80=99t think what theymos did is =
very constructive.I understand his position=E2=80=A6but it only hurts =
the cause, unfortunately - the PR battle is not the same thing as a =
discussion on technical merits. He hurts the PR battle and plays into =
Mike=E2=80=99s hand by doing that. The actual underlying issue actually =
has little to do with block size - it has to do with Mike and Gavin =
feeling that the core devs are being obstructionist.</div><div =
class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">Regardless of the =
technical merits of XT, the fact that we=E2=80=99ve never done a hard =
fork before, not even for things some other devs have wanted=E2=80=A6and =
not due to any malice on anyone=E2=80=99s part but because simply =
that=E2=80=99s just the nature of decentralized consensus with =
well-defined settlement guarantees=E2=80=A6this is the problem - Mike =
and Gavin think they=E2=80=99re somehow special and their fork should be =
pushed while the rest of us resist pushing our own controversial pet =
ideas because we want civility and understand that at this stage in =
Bitcoin=E2=80=99s development trying to fork the blockchain over highly =
divisive issues is counterproductive and destructive.</div><div =
class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">But the fact of the =
matter is that in the PR battle, arguments against the fork actually =
play into Mike=E2=80=99s hand, and that=E2=80=99s the problem.</div><div =
class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">The whole block size =
thing is too nuanced and too easily spun simplistically. It=E2=80=99s =
too easy to spin resistance to bigger blocks (even though the resistance =
is actually much more towards untested hardforking mechanisms and =
serious security concerns) as =E2=80=9Cobstructionism=E2=80=9D and =
it=E2=80=99s too easy to spin bigger blocks as =E2=80=9Cscalability=E2=80=9D=
 because most of the people can=E2=80=99t tell the fucking =
difference.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">The =
fact is most of the people don=E2=80=99t really understand the =
fundamental issue and are taking sides based on charismatic leadership =
and authority which is actually entirely counter to the spirit of =
decentralized consensus. It=E2=80=99s beyond ironic.</div><div =
class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">If you guys want to win =
the PR battle, the key is to make it clear that you are not =
obstructionist and are giving everyone equal treatment=E2=80=A6Bitcoin =
was designed such that changing the rules is *hard* and this is a =
feature. Bitcoin simply does not have a reliable and tested hard forking =
mechanism=E2=80=A6and a hard fork for such a politically divisive issue =
will almost certainly lead to a lack of cooperation and refusal to work =
together out of spite. All of us would like to be able to process more =
transactions on the network. It=E2=80=99s not a matter of whether we =
think higher capacity is a bad thing - it=E2=80=99s more that some of us =
are concerned that Bitcoin is not sufficiently mature to be able to =
handle such a schism with so much hostility.</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">Let=E2=80=99s face it, folks - from a =
PR standpoint, the block size issue is irrelevant. Nobody really =
understands it except for a handful of people - I=E2=80=99ve tried to =
explain it, I=E2=80=99ve even written articles about it - but most =
people just don=E2=80=99t get it. Most people don=E2=80=99t really get =
scalability either - they seem to think that scalability is just doing =
the same thing you=E2=80=99ve always done manyfold.</div><div =
class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">Block size is an =
especially dangerous issue politically because it=E2=80=99s one of those =
that requires deep understanding yet superficially sounds really simple. =
It=E2=80=99s perfect Dunning-Kruger bait.</div></div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">So let=E2=80=99s be a little smarter =
about this.</div></div></div></blockquote></div><br =
class=3D""></div></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail=_B9B633AD-65C7-4556-8CCA-DF97D6BF0AA2--

--Apple-Mail=_0F291550-39D1-4BF5-81B2-5F9FA0620DAB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
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=+f57
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_0F291550-39D1-4BF5-81B2-5F9FA0620DAB--