{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1ac86vemj7ce5z8jyxt39rna3tvwql6xd30ha3vxcd6esysp23d9qrlswfj","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1ac86vemj7ce5z8jyxt39rna3tvwql6xd30ha3vxcd6esysp23d9qrlswfj","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-06-01\n📝 Original message:Agree with everything you said.  Spot on observations on all counts.\nThank you for speaking up.\n\nAdam\n\nOn 1 June 2015 at 13:45, Jérôme Legoupil \u003cjjlegoupil at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003eWhat do other people think?\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003eIf we can't come to an agreement soon, then I'll ask for help\n\u003e\u003ereviewing/submitting patches to Mike's Bitcoin-Xt project that implement a\n\u003e\u003ebig increase now that grows over time so we may never have to go through\n\u003e\u003eall this rancor and debate again.\"\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003eI'll then ask for help lobbying the merchant services and exchanges and\n\u003e\u003ehosted wallet companies and other bitcoind-using-infrastructure companies\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e It's surprising to see a core dev going to the public to defend a proposal\n\u003e most other core devs disagree on, and then lobbying the Bitcoin ecosystem.\n\u003e\n\u003e This is an very unhealthy way to go because it incentives the other core\n\u003e devs to stop their technical work and go public and lobby too (cf G.Maxwell\n\u003e trying to raise redditters awareness).\n\u003e\n\u003e We need core devs to work on technical issues, not waste time doing\n\u003e politics, but Gavin's confrontational approach doesn't give them much of a\n\u003e choice.\n\u003e\n\u003e I fear that because of this approach, in the next monthes, core devs with be\n\u003e lobbying and doing politics : precious time will be wasted for everyone\n\u003e having stake in Bitcoin.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Regarding the 20MB proposal content:\n\u003e\n\u003e Decentralization is the core of Bitcoin's security model and thus that's\n\u003e what gives Bitcoin its value.\n\u003e\n\u003e The danger is that decentralization tends naturally towards centralization,\n\u003e because centralization is more efficient. Going from decentralization to\n\u003e centralization is easy, going the other way is a lot harder :\n\u003e decentralization we lose, may never be gained back.\n\u003e\n\u003e Regarding \"the urgency to do something\":\n\u003e\n\u003e I believe it would be extremely healthy for the network to bump into any\n\u003e limit ASAP ... (let it be 1MB) : to incentive layer 2 and offchain solutions\n\u003e to scale Bitcoin : there are promising designs/solutions out there (LN,\n\u003e ChainDB, OtherCoin protocole, ...), but most don't get much attention,\n\u003e because there is right now no need for them. And, I am sure new solutions\n\u003e will be invented.\n\u003e\n\u003e If during the \"1MB bumpy period\" something goes wrong, consensus among the\n\u003e community would be reached easily if necessary.\n\u003e\n\u003e Pretending there is urgency and that Apocalypse is approaching is a fallacy.\n\u003e\n\u003e The Gavin 20MB proposal is compromising Bitcoin's long-term security in an\n\u003e irreversible way, for gaining short-term better user experience.\n\u003e\n\u003e I oppose the Gavin proposal in both content and form.\n\u003e\n\u003e Cheers,\n\u003e Jerome\n\u003e\n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\u003e"}