{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub19r53ufymeycp9wzk3yzru55y5u46e4vva2lj7nak4zrn6yhrna7qsyj32s","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub19r53ufymeycp9wzk3yzru55y5u46e4vva2lj7nak4zrn6yhrna7qsyj32s","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-07-22\n📝 Original message:I'm not sure why Bitcoin Core and the rules and policies that it\nenforces are being conflated in this thread. There's nothing stopping\nus from adding the ability for the user to decide what their consensus\nparameters should be at runtime. In fact, that's already in use:\n./bitcoind -testnet. As mentioned in another thread, the chain params\ncould even come from a config file that the user could edit without\ntouching the code.\n\nI realize that it'd be opening Pandora's Box, and likely met with very\nloud and reasonable arguments about the obvious terrible implications,\nbut it's at least an alternative to the current status quo of Core's\nconflation with the consensus rules. The idea really is no different\nthan suggesting that someone fork the codebase and implement their own\nchanges, it just cuts out most of the work required.\n\nWith that in place, consensus changes would be more about lobbying and\ncoalitions, and less about pull requests.\n\nCory\n\nOn Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Raystonn via bitcoin-dev\n\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e If the developers fail to reflect user consensus, the network will let us\n\u003e\u003e know.\n\u003e\n\u003e This is true with the caveat that there must be more than one option present\n\u003e for the network to show it's preference.  If developers discourage anything\n\u003e that forks from the rules enforced by Bitcoin Core, they harm the network's\n\u003e ability to inform us of a failure to reflect user consensus.\n\u003e\n\u003e On 22 Jul 2015 3:31 pm, Jeff Garzik via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e I wouldn't go quite that far.  The reality is somewhere in the middle, as\n\u003e Bryan Cheng noted in this thread:\n\u003e\n\u003e Quoting BC,\n\u003e\u003e Upgrading to a version of Bitcoin Core that is incompatible with your\n\u003e\u003e ideals is in no way a forced choice, as you have stated in your email;\n\u003e\u003e forks, alternative clients, or staying on an older version are all valid\n\u003e\u003e choices. If the majority of the network chooses not to endorse a specific\n\u003e\u003e change, then the majority of the network will continue to operate just fine\n\u003e\u003e without it, and properly structured consensus rules will pull the minority\n\u003e\u003e along as well.\n\u003e\n\u003e The developers propose a new version, by publishing a new release.  The\n\u003e individual network nodes choose to accept or reject that.\n\u003e\n\u003e So I respectfully disagree with \"core devs don't control the network\" and\n\u003e \"core devs control the network\" both.\n\u003e\n\u003e There are checks-and-balances that make the system work.  Consensus is most\n\u003e strongly measured by user actions after software release.  If the developers\n\u003e fail to reflect user consensus, the network will let us know.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e Hi Pieter,\n\u003e\n\u003e I think a core area of disagreement is this:\n\u003e\n\u003e Bitcoin Core is not running the Bitcoin economy, and its developers have no\n\u003e authority to set its rules.\n\u003e\n\u003e In fact Bitcoin Core is running the Bitcoin economy, and its developers do\n\u003e have the authority to set its rules. This is enforced by the reality of\n\u003e ~100% market share and limited github commit access.\n\u003e\n\u003e You may not like this situation, but it is what it is. By refusing to make a\n\u003e release with different rules, people who disagree are faced with only two\n\u003e options:\n\u003e\n\u003e 1. Swallow it even if they hate it\n\u003e 2. Fork the project and fork the block chain with it (XT)\n\u003e\n\u003e There are no alternatives. People who object to (2) are inherently\n\u003e suggesting (1) is the only acceptable path, which not surprisingly, makes a\n\u003e lot of people very angry.\n\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e"}