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 1WSBZY-0004Nf-KO for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:34:16 +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 1WSBZT-00054J-7N for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:34:16 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (uid 1000) by nl.grid.coop with local; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 15:34:03 -0500 id 000000000006A343.00000000533096BB.00002426 Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 15:34:03 -0500 From: Troy Benjegerdes To: Mark Friedenbach Message-ID: <20140324203403.GR3180@nl.grid.coop> References: <20140322084702.GA13436@savin> <20140322193435.GC6047@savin> <20140323231737.GM3180@nl.grid.coop> <532F740C.9010800@monetize.io> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <532F740C.9010800@monetize.io> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.5 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1WSBZT-00054J-7N Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Handling miner adoption gracefully for embedded consensus systems via double-spending/replace-by-fee 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: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:34:16 -0000 I think that's fair, so long as we limit bitcoin-development discussion to issues that are relevant to the owners of the hashrate and companies that pay developer salaries. What I'm asking for is some honesty that Bitcoin is a centralized system and to stop arguing technical points on the altar of distributed/decentralized whatever. It's pretty clear if you want decentralized you should go with altchains. I'm here because I want to sell corn for bitcoin, and I believe it will be more profitable for me to do that with a bitcoin-blockchain-based system in which I have the capability to audit the code that executes the trade. On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 04:53:48PM -0700, Mark Friedenbach wrote: > This isn't distributed-systems-development, it is bitcoin-development. > Discussion over chain parameters is a fine thing to have among people > who are interested in that sort of thing. But not here. > > On 03/23/2014 04:17 PM, Troy Benjegerdes wrote: > > I find it very irresponsible for Bitcoiners to on one hand extol the virtues > > of distributed systems and then in the same message claim any discussion > > about alternate chains as 'off-topic'. > > > > If bitcoin-core is for *distributed systems*, then all the different altcoins > > with different hash algorithms should be viable topics for discussion.