{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2014-04-23\n📝 Original message:\u003e\n\u003e Non-developers are more comfortable using social media tools. Blog\n\u003e posts can be shared, Tweeted, and commented upon using nothing more\n\u003e than a web browser.\n\u003e\n\nI don't think Twitter is an appropriate medium for discussing the details\nof byzantine consensus algorithms.\n\nI'm not going to bother arguing in replies to a blog post. Suffice it to\nsay, miners are already handsomely compensated via both inflation and fees\nfor doing their job of preventing double spends. Your suggestion is people\nshould pay them EVEN MORE for simply not being corrupt. My proposal is\nsimpler - how about we find the ones that are claiming people's money via\ncoinbases yet not doing their jobs correctly, and take the money back (or\ndestroy it). I think I prefer that one. Miners that are maliciously double\nspending cannot justify their existence, they offer no useful service and\ndo not deserve compensation as a result.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140423/2ba5d5ad/attachment.html\u003e"}