What about immutability? All this years preaching the dogma and now let's use social consensus to decide what chain we like?
-
-
Replying to @CryptoSecundus @muellerberndt and
Radical immutability serves no purpose. Bitcoin is a tool made by humans to serve humans. If it stops being useless, we need to be able to change it (and we are - we can always move to an identical copy without e.g. a bug)
17 replies 5 retweets 44 likes -
Replying to @hasufl @CryptoSecundus and
"Serves no purpose"?! WTF?! Good grief you are one of these vile creatures: https://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2006/10/hello-kitty-people.html … You have outed yourself as an enemy of Bitcoin security. Blocked.
18 replies 20 retweets 203 likes -
Replying to @NickSzabo4 @hasufl and
Nick, I'd urge you to reconsidering blocking Hasu. He's a potent and thoughtful Bitcoiner.
9 replies 1 retweet 51 likes -
Replying to @nic__carter @NickSzabo4 and
to the triggered people below: bitcoin will fail if it has no intellectual diversity. ideas need to be fought over in the market, not ignored and feared. luckily, the puritans have no control, and they're not persuasive.
8 replies 5 retweets 75 likes -
Replying to @nic__carter @NickSzabo4 and
I agree with the previous tweet but “bitcoin will fail if it has no intellectual diversity” isn’t very meaningful. Bitcoin doesn’t have intellect, it’s an asset class. Stakeholders will be diversified because.. why won’t they be? and the occasional block has nothing to do with it
4 replies 1 retweet 27 likes -
Replying to @udiWertheimer @nic__carter and
I disagree; Bitcoin's future depends on a disparate community of people collectively expressing their values and making good decisions. The UASF was a decision; future decisions do/may include Schnorr, sighash_noinput, blocksize inc/dec, on-chain privacy improvements, etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @DZack23 @udiWertheimer and
To the extend that they are unable to engage w/ diverse ideas and challenge their assumptions, the likelihood of them making good decisions decreases
3 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @DZack23 @nic__carter and
Diversity of ideas is important but it’s not the top priority on an individual’s plate, sometimes diversity takes a hit for some other value (like a false positive when blocking people to salvage one’s time), that’s balanced and normal
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @udiWertheimer @DZack23 and
And it's not diversity, it's bog common error. I see "governance is good" on my tweet stream every day. Multitudes don't understand that the main value add of Bitcoin comes from using simple rules strongly enforced by security protocol to minimize vulnerability to governance.
4 replies 7 retweets 65 likes
I try to block them, but these we-need-more-governance zombie clones keep coming over the walls like plague victims from some horror flick.
-
-
Replying to @NickSzabo4 @udiWertheimer and
They mean something different: how can we minimize even more the vulnerabilities! Human beings don't genuinely want to be told what to do, but they want to be protected from intrusions of others.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cyrillapinte @NickSzabo4 and
When I look at Bitcoin or Ethereum (among others), I am worried that few guys can Influence a community. The power is still not that well distributed.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.