<unnamed>

Public Key

npub1xqjzjc3nk9n9ulffnytv307dmr8lvt5sd98ph5xrpv7sset8f6csj7arvv

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsrqfpfvgemzej7055ej9kghlxa3nlk96gxjnsm6rpsk0ggv4n5avgprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuumwdae8gtnnda3kjctvrvmc0h

Publishing to

relay.snort.social

Last Notes

2023-06-09 15:08:56 CEST

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2023-06-03
📝 Original message:
The Lightning Network is a great achievement. I have created satoshi at vistomail.com as my lightning address. I feel comfortable now that humans have the ability to conduct global business and scale with fast, and secure lightning payments. Lightning can process more transactions per second than any financial instrument. You are light years ahead of the traditional banking system. Bitcoin is a huge success and will continue to scale.
Satoshi Nakamoto
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20230603/62fa2e14/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: publickey - satoshi at vistomail.com - 0xE21BDB6C.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 653 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20230603/62fa2e14/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20230603/62fa2e14/attachment.sig>

2023-06-07 19:35:37 CEST

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-08-15
📝 Original message: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.
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.
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.
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.
Satoshi Nakamoto

2023-06-07 17:47:22 CEST

- reply