Mike Hearn [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2014-04-27 📝 Original message:> > That moves us away ...
📅 Original date posted:2014-04-27
📝 Original message:>
> That moves us away from a pure trustless system built upon a small
> democratic foundation (as something of a necessary evil in an imperfect
> world where humans run our computers and use our system) and toward a
> "democratic system".
>
> You don't have to agree, but I hope you can understand the point I'm
> making :-)
Yep, your point is well made.
I don't have much more to say about this proposal specifically, but I think
this whole question of what changes are OK and what would be a violation of
the social contract will get discussed endlessly over the coming years. Put
another way, what do Bitcoin's users expect and want - a system that
evolves or a system that remains exactly as they found it? There will be
good arguments on both sides, and the answer will probably be different on
a case by case basis. But personally I'm skeptical of any argument that
argues against change for its own sake. It has to be an argument rooted in
a careful analysis of costs and benefits.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140427/acb15bfc/attachment.html>;
📝 Original message:>
> That moves us away from a pure trustless system built upon a small
> democratic foundation (as something of a necessary evil in an imperfect
> world where humans run our computers and use our system) and toward a
> "democratic system".
>
> You don't have to agree, but I hope you can understand the point I'm
> making :-)
Yep, your point is well made.
I don't have much more to say about this proposal specifically, but I think
this whole question of what changes are OK and what would be a violation of
the social contract will get discussed endlessly over the coming years. Put
another way, what do Bitcoin's users expect and want - a system that
evolves or a system that remains exactly as they found it? There will be
good arguments on both sides, and the answer will probably be different on
a case by case basis. But personally I'm skeptical of any argument that
argues against change for its own sake. It has to be an argument rooted in
a careful analysis of costs and benefits.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140427/acb15bfc/attachment.html>;