{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2014-10-01\n📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\nHash: SHA256\n\n\n\nOn 1 October 2014 08:01:28 GMT-07:00, Gavin Andresen \u003cgavinandresen at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003eVery nice, semantics are clear and use cases are compelling.\n\nThanks!\n\n\u003eCan we defer discussion of how to roll this out for a little bit, and\n\u003esee\n\u003eif there is consensus that:\n\u003e\n\u003ea) benefits of having this outweigh risks\n\u003eb) we're all happy with exact semantics\n\u003e\n\u003eThen we can have a knock-down drag-out argument about whether it should\n\u003eroll out as a soft fork, wait for a hard fork, be combined with some\n\u003eother\n\u003ethings that it would be nice to add or change, etc.....\n\nAgreed. People should keep in mind that leaving the deployment details as \"TBD\" was quite deliberate. There is some code in the repo to implement a softfork, but it's only meant to be illustrative.\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\nVersion: APG v1.1.1\n\niQFQBAEBCAA6BQJULKT9MxxQZXRlciBUb2RkIChsb3cgc2VjdXJpdHkga2V5KSA8\ncGV0ZUBwZXRlcnRvZGQub3JnPgAKCRAZnIM7qOfwhevAB/0eTWleef5GehrH03tZ\nNrOdtJ881NhXJpB3p81jPyT9z4gv9u3M5bkjMOvClQaf8PX551ICgKbWDQTNf9oS\nTF/blkqWRWX28VLkNsMUQNN/dd7rdqDMpnwcN8worgHToRMa4drFBU/MXapedMLQ\nSb2ETXGYPm4b/HqgFf9j/EGt8jhmnk4HiSwZ6wdhdYLbbZ6NhplSR8tTs+GouAWp\nPHntN6DQI8oFDaIKkMbs2dDlpXSGG9hxr6m46LBwp/CHBY9aKkwLyaJXkMVovP3J\nHrSYTzlCmjrDNbLJwIze+fyO2UDkgZUzjVENfMvixcQNdz0pVoCzJ2BK8b4fAc7Y\nmaRA\n=Mz3E\n-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----"}