rich1.0npub1kc0zulxt7j4a0ayhzhrz7jk84y7tm4026qcky7w97hlfkxxap24qnwjfw4https://nostr.ae/npub1kc0zulxt7j4a0ayhzhrz7jk84y7tm4026qcky7w97hlfkxxap24qnwjfw4njumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-08-15 📝 Original message:Sign with the key 5EC948A1 or shut up, you scammer Satoshi Nakamoto via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-08-15 13:43 寫到: > I have been following the recent block size debates through the > mailing list. I had hoped the debate would resolve and that a fork > proposal would achieve widespread consensus. However with the formal > release of Bitcoin XT 0.11A, this looks unlikely to happen, and so I > am forced to share my concerns about this very dangerous fork. > > The developers of this pretender-Bitcoin claim to be following my > original vision, but nothing could be further from the truth. When I > designed Bitcoin, I designed it in such a way as to make future > modifications to the consensus rules difficult without near unanimous > agreement. Bitcoin was designed to be protected from the influence of > charismatic leaders, even if their name is Gavin Andresen, Barack > Obama, or Satoshi Nakamoto. Nearly everyone has to agree on a change, > and they have to do it without being forced or pressured into it. By > doing a fork in this way, these developers are violating the "original > vision" they claim to honour. > > They use my old writings to make claims about what Bitcoin was > supposed to be. However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since > that time, and new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of > my early opinions. For example I didn't anticipate pooled mining and > its effects on the security of the network. Making Bitcoin a > competitive monetary system while also preserving its security > properties is not a trivial problem, and we should take more time to > come up with a robust solution. I suspect we need a better incentive > for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism. > > If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what > "Bitcoin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and > through the use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice but to > declare Bitcoin a failed project. Bitcoin was meant to be both > technically and socially robust. This present situation has been very > disappointing to watch unfold. > > Satoshi Nakamoto > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev