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
|
Return-Path: <laszlo@heliacal.net>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 834BF847
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 15 Aug 2015 19:16:53 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: delayed 00:07:49 by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail3.heliacal.net (mail3.heliacal.net [91.234.48.203])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA5A4149
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 15 Aug 2015 19:16:52 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heliacal.net;
s=t2678542rf; t=1439665742;
bh=V7CpdVKV9jdNBVg65ExZKTUZNclDO0wtFcHNlrlsGk8=;
h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To:From;
b=bKfJNr9QdLQDbiaVqEg4G+/mdvDZLQ32YuPnSkEyIdPdpGFZxum0JsLXq0k+Vmbgt
H7RdcT3++4ywaK4M0Ya047QC7x1p4vPz1ThJ59nmoVoT8SiI/It7jQFrnOOrCnc18J
87KN4E2D9S7tMUz9bFSv7qFFGgI71mKbzHz4trN8=
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Laszlo Hanyecz <laszlo@heliacal.net>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
In-Reply-To: <6EC9DDF352DC4838AE9B088AB372428A25E1F42A@DS04>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2015 19:08:58 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <BFFD13C0-DBE2-4EA0-9FBC-5E334A722527@heliacal.net>
References: <6EC9DDF352DC4838AE9B088AB372428A25E1F42A@DS04>
To: satoshi@vistomail.com
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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: Sat, 15 Aug 2015 19:16:53 -0000
Sounds legit.
On Aug 15, 2015, at 5:43 PM, 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.
>=20
> 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.
>=20
> 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.
>=20
> 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.
>=20
> Satoshi Nakamoto
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
|
