2/ In the tweet I quoted above you present a mathematical tautology that seems obvious, but I think when unpacked it's a lot less obvious than as presented. Let me, however, agree with you: someone who codes for a protocol and is HODLer is doing more than someone merely HODLing
-
এই থ্রেডটি দেখান
-
3/ The crux is whether incentives should be baked in at the protocol/institutional level through pre-mine/ICO. E.g., an ICO which pays devs to work on the protocol. Above you seemingly conflate being a dev-HODLer with someone being paid by protocol-based incentive structure.
১ reply ১ টি পুনঃটুইট ৩৭টি পছন্দএই থ্রেডটি দেখান -
Vijay Boyapati Vijay Boyapati পুনঃটুইট করেছেন
4/ People who get paid by protocol based incentives are not necessarily HODLers - very few are. Those who are paid crypto to keep the lights on are more likely to sell to pay the bills. HODLing requires *ideological conviction*:https://twitter.com/real_vijay/status/942264914453786624 …
Vijay Boyapati যোগ করেছে,
Vijay Boyapati @real_vijay3/ If Bitcoin did not already comport with your view of the world, you were likely to dismiss it completely, or at best, think of it as a quick trading opportunity. It was only those who understood it at an ideological and economic level that were able to HODL through adversity.এই থ্রেডটি দেখান৩ replies ৮ টি পুনঃটুইট ৬৭টি পছন্দএই থ্রেডটি দেখান -
5/ The people who have conviction (which requires a deep understanding of the protocol) are the very best kind of devs to have when you have them. This kind of developer is motivated by a stronger incentive: the desire to change the world for ideological reasons.
১ reply ৪ টি পুনঃটুইট ৯৫টি পছন্দএই থ্রেডটি দেখান -
6/ My experience as an early engineer at Google also taught me that one good developer can be more productive than 10 or even 100 average developers. And when it comes to cryptographic protocol development, I dare say it's more like 1000x.
৫ replies ১৪ টি পুনঃটুইট ১১৯টি পছন্দএই থ্রেডটি দেখান -
7/ Would you rather one Greg Maxwell/
@pwuille or 1000 Javascript coders? The latter, in my opinion, are as likely to produce solid protocol code as a 1000 monkeys are to produce Hamlet.৫ replies ২৪ টি পুনঃটুইট ১৬৮টি পছন্দএই থ্রেডটি দেখান -
8/ Let's not, however, minimize the point you are making: paying people to work on a protocol can help the development of that protocol (people do need to eat). But does that need to be baked into the protocol? I think not.
১ reply ১ টি পুনঃটুইট ৪৬টি পছন্দএই থ্রেডটি দেখান -
9/ An alternative model is patronage, and it's certainly alive and well in the Bitcoin community.
@ChaincodeLabs is an example of this: You have owners with strong ideological conviction with the means to fund development and to be discriminating in who they hire.৩ replies ০ টি পুনঃটুইট ৬২টি পছন্দএই থ্রেডটি দেখান -
10/ Finally, the baking of incentives into the protocol sullies the protocol and muddies the ideological waters. What are we here for? To change the world, or to make some, e.g., some Ethereum foundation members rich?
৪ replies ১ টি পুনঃটুইট ৬৫টি পছন্দএই থ্রেডটি দেখান -
11/ The purity of the Bitcoin protocol is what makes it a banner that millions can (and will) rally too. The purity is also what makes so many passionate about defending it in the face of perceived threats (as I imagine you are now aware of :)
৭ replies ৯ টি পুনঃটুইট ১৫৬টি পছন্দএই থ্রেডটি দেখান
By paying attention to these debates,I've realize the fundamental differences in idiology of those who truely believe in decentralized vs centralized. It's (real values, ethic, moral, dedication & strong conviction) vs (marketing, PR, lobbying, maximizing profit,crony capitalism)
লোড হতে বেশ কিছুক্ষণ সময় নিচ্ছে।
টুইটার তার ক্ষমতার বাইরে চলে গেছে বা কোনো সাময়িক সমস্যার সম্মুখীন হয়েছে আবার চেষ্টা করুন বা আরও তথ্যের জন্য টুইটারের স্থিতি দেখুন।