{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1rv5ajnhgrc0wq3ulrk6tcjkgsaq8h4rs5rtsvrnklz4j0lw40egqphc5wt","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1rv5ajnhgrc0wq3ulrk6tcjkgsaq8h4rs5rtsvrnklz4j0lw40egqphc5wt","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-08-15\n📝 Original message:\u003e You may be misremembering; nobody has ever disagreed that you can fork a\n\u003e source code repository. Perhaps you are thinking instead about the\n\u003e concerns regarding \"asymmetric\" rule incompatibilities?\n\nI am not \"misremembering\" anything.  Some people have claimed for years \nthat Bitcoin development is \"decentralized\" because anyone can fork the \ncode.  I have often pointed out to them that such a process is not \ndecentralization similar to the process of Bitcoin mining.  It is \nprobably closer to checks and balances you see in political systems. The \nresponse is usually that I am \"troll\" or that I am somehow attacking the \ndevelopers by simply describing the system.  The result is that the \nissues and risks associated with development are often not properly \nevaluated.  It is the same sorts of problems you have when a central \nbank or Fed is controlled by a small group.  It is just human nature and \nBitcoin is not immune.\n\nRuss"}