Luke Dashjr [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2019-04-04 📝 Original message:On Wednesday 03 April 2019 ...
📅 Original date posted:2019-04-04
📝 Original message:On Wednesday 03 April 2019 21:39:32 Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Luke's comment that it could "lead to users trusting third parties (like
> developers) way too much" is pertinent too, but I think an honest abatement
> of that concern is impossible without teaching everyone C++.
Learning C++ is something within everyone's capability. Even people who do not
wish to learn it can hire someone to perform review for them.
> "Developers"
> as an open group (anyone can fork the github repo, find a problem, and make
> an issue) deserve the trust we put in them, and that's because they're
> accountable (any such error found in the repo will have been put there by
> someone).
No, we are not. We explicitly disclaim any warranty, and do not want your
trust.
> The same thing goes for making it possible to download (*not
> just the compiled software*, but) the entire UTXO Set if a commitment of it
> is hardcoded into the software, as James suggests.
Verifying a UTXO set commitment is impossible short of a real IBD. It's not
even comparable.
> We all trust
> "developers" like that, and it's okay.
No, it isn't okay. There are plenty of fiat options if you want a trust-based
currency. Bitcoin is supposed to be something more than that.
Luke
📝 Original message:On Wednesday 03 April 2019 21:39:32 Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Luke's comment that it could "lead to users trusting third parties (like
> developers) way too much" is pertinent too, but I think an honest abatement
> of that concern is impossible without teaching everyone C++.
Learning C++ is something within everyone's capability. Even people who do not
wish to learn it can hire someone to perform review for them.
> "Developers"
> as an open group (anyone can fork the github repo, find a problem, and make
> an issue) deserve the trust we put in them, and that's because they're
> accountable (any such error found in the repo will have been put there by
> someone).
No, we are not. We explicitly disclaim any warranty, and do not want your
trust.
> The same thing goes for making it possible to download (*not
> just the compiled software*, but) the entire UTXO Set if a commitment of it
> is hardcoded into the software, as James suggests.
Verifying a UTXO set commitment is impossible short of a real IBD. It's not
even comparable.
> We all trust
> "developers" like that, and it's okay.
No, it isn't okay. There are plenty of fiat options if you want a trust-based
currency. Bitcoin is supposed to be something more than that.
Luke