{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1jkdfcglr59lwnhek94l393g0hhhaj0v5yzz3n5s3p0r9u0576sgs7373ck","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1jkdfcglr59lwnhek94l393g0hhhaj0v5yzz3n5s3p0r9u0576sgs7373ck","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2014-04-30\n📝 Original message:On 30/04/14 23:55, Mike Hearn wrote:\n\u003e     If Bitcoin works correctly nobody should have to care if they consider\n\u003e     themselves attackers, defenders, or little green men from Mars.\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e One last time, I request that people read the white paper from 2008\n\u003e before making statements like this. If the notion of attacker was\n\u003e irrelevant to Bitcoin, it would not be mentioned in the abstract, would it? \n\nI've read it :) The notion of an attacker is obviously relevant to\nsomeone designing the system. It should not be relevant to someone\nrunning a node.\n\nI'll retire from posting on this too, I've posted way too much.\n\nOur fundamental disagreement is simply that you think Bitcoin is, or\nshould be, a /democratic/ system. I think Bitcoin is, and should be, a\n/trustless/ system. If we're going to resort to appeal to authority,\nI'll point to the words \"Electronic Cash System\" in the title of\nSatoshi's whitepaper :-P He intended to create ecash; that's widely\nunderstood to mean trustless.\n\nIf there was this magic computer up in the sky somewhere, free from\nhuman influence, that would run Satoshi's code for him in perpetuity\n(let's overlook the initial upload please, bear with me), then I believe\nSatoshi would've built his perfectly trustless ecash to run on that.\n\nFor lack of such a magic masterless computer he had to approximate one,\ningeniously using distributed consensus to achieve it. That's his real\ninvention - the \"magic masterless computer\" simulator, and the incentive\nscheme to get the world to run it for him. (We'll see more of what it\ncan do if Ethereum ever gets off the ground.)\n\nBut for Pete's sake, Bitcoin is trustless. Just because the\ninfrastructure it sits atop is \"democratic\" (because there was no other\nway to implement it,) doesn't mean you suddenly have to start voting on\neverything.\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 555 bytes\nDesc: OpenPGP digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140501/afb10d09/attachment.sig\u003e"}