It's amazingly cringe arguing with non-developers about why ceasing work on the base Bitcoin protocol is retarded rather than a genius way to eliminate risk.
Login to reply
Replies (24)
My spirit animal.
Is someone prominent arguing against maintenance?
I'm not a Bitcoin dev, but I've built software tools for people and can code. Everyone knows that the systems like these always needs tweaks, vulnerability fixes, etc. Maybe I'm misreading, but my read is that responsible development should kind of follow a similar mantra to "first, do no harm".
I too find it strange that people here are mischaracterizing what Saylor is saying and seem to prefer personal attacks rather than discussing the issues.
“Saylor hates devs!”
“Saylor is a spook!”
“You’re a Saylor shill!”
“Saylor wants to break bitcoin!”
🙄
It’s like I fell into bitcoin middle school. I’m hoping we can start thinking critically again.
Easy explanation: the road are done, should we fire all road workers?
Maintenance, upkeep, improvement
It's literally retarded. In the literal sense of the word.
It's amazingly cringe arguing with non-developers about why ceasing work on the base Bitcoin protocol is retarded rather than a genius way to eliminate risk.
View quoted note →
A very large number of these links do not work
Consider wikifreedia or some other more resilient storage. I really wanted to read about them
GitHub
physical-bitcoin-attacks/README.md at master · jlopp/physical-bitcoin-attacks
A list of known attacks against Bitcoin / crypto asset owning entities that occurred in meatspace. - jlopp/physical-bitcoin-attacks
Smoke and mirrors. Don’t fall for it
I didn't realize this was directed at Saylor specifically. I recall him talking about Bitcoin development and I didn't think was position was unreasonable - I interpreted his position as one of advocating for a cautious approach to development.
Not only developers run nodes, so you are going to have to argue with them if you want to convince them of your point of view
Thnx for your perspective from a retard 😜👍🏽
Ossification of software is impossible.
Ossification of network protocols is inevitable.
I don't know what Saylor wants, I haven't spoken to him regarding this matter.
Sometimes developers might be genius at tech but dont have a cooking clue about money, history, philosophy and economics iow money. In fact , I think thats a rule. Techies like everyone , need to remain humble.
THIS. The discussion must be about ideas, not people. Plus, it's very funny that now bitcoiners feel so annoyed because someone thinks about his own business and interests.
If only other people could acknowledge this instead of debating someone who isn't present.
What "work" is done on the base layer? What risk is eliminated by doing said work?
I tried finding Satohi's final message. Found ths being his last message I believe. "I've moved on to other things. It's in good hands with Gavin and everyone."
Did mean the devs?
You don't need to be a genius developer to understand this. It's just retarded people. Remember there are retarded developers such as those creating shitcoins.
Updating security on the base layer is different than enabling new features that can break it
Lmao, who is saying this?
Don’t trust…….. verify……. ;o)
I would understand these attacks better if Saylor was trying to get some personal business advantage.
Based on my read of the situation, Saylor just doesn’t want devs to screw up the base protocol. ODELL implied that funding was offered but with “strings attached”.
That apparently was unacceptable to these folks on nostr so hence the personal attacks and chaos that polarized and set the community against each other.
Then don't do it.