Ok, how does that analogy help?
-
-
Replying to @maxkeisor @derose and
Christians = All BTC client flavors? Catholics = Core? Why is it referred to as Bitcoin Core then? No one refers to Christians by their most dominant subgroup.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @pdubl22 @maxkeisor and
Which Christian is the true Christian?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Religion is entirely subjective, code is not. Everyone is free to use whichever code, network consensus rules they prefer, but certain code, network, and rules are objectively better. Let’s not use this comparison ever again please, whoever started it.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @realLudvigArt @pdubl22 and
Blockchain, and all other forms of money, is entirely a matter of faith, and managing that faith.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Sure, that’s the network side of things. But the underlying code (which rules are one subset of) is not.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @realLudvigArt @pdubl22 and
Yes it is. Segwit was a hack designed to comport with community morality. It was not an efficient solution otherwise.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @nvk @realLudvigArt and
If a hard fork was on the table, Bitcoin would have looked very different. (Hence the necessity for morality compliance)
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Hmm, I’m not sure “community morality” is the reason to avoid HFs. Rather it is an objective, technical consideration: you want software (especially *protocol* software) to be maximally backward-compatible. Nothing to do with morality.
-
-
Replying to @hugohanoi @nvk and
If not for entrenched community beliefs, there's very little value to backward compatibility. (Hence all the shitcoins.)
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.

