To repeat something I've said before: the Bitcoin protocol does not exist in any meaningful sense of the word. One C++ codebase rules all.
-
-
-
If Bitcoin were *actually* a protocol, a spat between developers of one client would not be *existential threat to all users everywhere.*
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
@Benathon More complicated than that. You have to be bug-for-bug compatible with "Core at this moment in time." If Core changes you fork off -
@Benathon Core can even fork the chain itself, amusingly. Happened in March 2013 due to removing a dependency on Berkeley DB.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@Benathon That's why every company in The BTC space does, which puts them all downstream of 5 people, the wisdom of which they're learning.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@patio11@ofnumbers Until we have the universal equation that answers everything then surely it's expected people try different things.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Bitcoin fork: short and sharply critical
@patio11 => https://twitter.com/patio11/status/632981809878335488 … VS. lengthy and supportive https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1 … -
My 2cents on the fork: open source software is anti-fragile because forks create competition. Let the best codebase win, & .: = protocol.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
@patio11 heard some stuff about forking the source. Need to read more about it. What's the story in short?Thanks. 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.