Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 29. (Read 2032247 times)

Bitcoin XT Fork

Satoshi Nakamoto satoshi at vistomail.com
Sat Aug 15 17:43:54 UTC 2015
Previous message: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin XT 0.11A
Next message: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin XT Fork
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
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

Does he have a PGP key?

It looks like Peter Todd made some research about that question: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg06194.html

Well for one Garzik is not having it :

https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/632643215749869568

Oh you're right. Maybe he doesn't know how.

Can more people corroborate this? I am not familiar with his public history too much.

The real Satoshi has never signed anything.

The real Satoshi has never signed anything.

Sig or it didn't happen.

Holy hell, is this real?

http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.html

Another hoax?

/u/raisethelimit's cartoon was removed the moment I checked, but there's still a link in his response here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h424p/why_is_bitcoin_forking/cu45qah

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h4kzz/the_hypocrisy_of_a_thermos_bitcoin_political/

EDIT: /u/raisethelimit's link to his cartoon has now been removed.

That was a hoax - someone having a laugh using an account that had become dormant and hackable.

I would not mind if Hearn created XT sidechain and XT supporters will be merge mining both chains.

Win win. MC will stay small and BloatChainers will have unlimited space for spamming.
It would be fine if Blockstream shows XT-SC before the end of year.

It would be nice if Satoshi would weigh in on the debate now that it has come to a head with Mike's release of XT. The last time he did was in response to the media potentially using the Dorian Nakamoto story to discredit Bitcoin in a big way. This issue seems more pressing.

I'm sure he's out there watching closely. Maybe his silence says it all.

Satoshi returning to weigh in on ANY debate is the WORST possible outcome and would do nothing but reinforce lazy appeals to authority.