From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WCYqz-0000Zt-1r for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 18:11:41 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from nl.grid.coop ([50.7.166.116]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1WCYqy-0005xj-4t for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 18:11:41 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (uid 1000) by nl.grid.coop with local; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 12:11:32 -0600 id 000000000006A32E.0000000052F7C4D4.00006223 Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2014 12:11:32 -0600 From: Troy Benjegerdes To: Luke-Jr Message-ID: <20140209181132.GF3180@nl.grid.coop> References: <20140209171214.GA20126@savin> <201402091725.42306.luke@dashjr.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201402091725.42306.luke@dashjr.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.6 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1WCYqy-0005xj-4t Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Embedded consensus system upgrade procedures X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2014 18:11:41 -0000 On Sun, Feb 09, 2014 at 05:25:41PM +0000, Luke-Jr wrote: > On Sunday, February 09, 2014 5:12:14 PM Peter Todd wrote: > > We have an embedded consensus system and we want to be able to upgrade > > it with new rules. > > This asserts a central authority and gives developers too much power. I don't quite see how, There is nothing that 'forces' me to upgrade, unless I have chosen to run an operating system (MacOS, Windows, Android) that have automatic don't-ask-the-user update mechanisms. The bigger problem with 'asset transfer' of assets which do not exist soley in the blockchain is including the consensus of relevant local and distributed legal jurisdictions. For example, just because the 'colored coin' and blockchain consensus is that I 'electronically' signed a mortgage document giving some random internet company the rights to foreclose on my home does not mean that my local county Judge or Sheriff are going to do anything if the internet company cannot produce the original paper document with ink signature. The only 'assertion' of central authority here is people who download and run the code and submit to whatever the code asserts they are supposed to do. At least with the 'central authority' of the big-business bitcoin developer cabal I can read the code before I submit to it's central authority, and this is a significant improvement over amgibuous legislation or proprietary high-frequency trading algorithms.