From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 931D4486 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:39:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from outmail148095.authsmtp.com (outmail148095.authsmtp.com [62.13.148.95]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC1D8161 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:39:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-c232.authsmtp.com (mail-c232.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.232]) by punt22.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u5NBd8du085992; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:39:08 +0100 (BST) Received: from petertodd.org (ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com [52.5.185.120]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u5NBd5wa085783 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:39:06 +0100 (BST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B12EF4010D; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:37:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 01D6520217; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 07:39:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 07:39:04 -0400 From: Peter Todd To: Pieter Wuille Message-ID: <20160623113904.GA19686@fedora-21-dvm> References: <20160621221347.GC10196@fedora-21-dvm> <20160623105632.GB19241@fedora-21-dvm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="azLHFNyN32YCQGCU" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Server-Quench: 18272bfb-3937-11e6-829e-00151795d556 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aQdMdAEUEkAaAgsB AmAbWlZeU1R7WWQ7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq T0pMXVMcUQAWc0gE QU8eWhx1fwYIcXdw bAhjVnJcXhYsJ1t+ S01TCGwHMGF9YGIW BV1YdwJRcQRDe0tA b1YxNiYHcQ5VPz4z GA41ejw8IwAXBTpY REkIKkgfCV4RGSY7 XB0OVR8OJQUIVzk+ KQcnLVgHVFoWem8T CRN5AQ1AWwA8 X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1037:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 52.5.185.120/25 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Even more proposed BIP extensions to BIP 0070 X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:39:10 -0000 --azLHFNyN32YCQGCU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 01:30:45PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote: > On Jun 23, 2016 12:56, "Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev" < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >=20 > > In any case, I'd strongly argue that we remove BIP75 from the bips > repository, > > and boycott wallets that implement it. It's bad strategy for Bitcoin > developers > > to willingly participate in AML/KYC, just the same way as it's bad for > Tor to > > add wiretapping functionality, and W3C to support DRM tech. The minor > tactical > > wins you'll get our of this aren't worth it. >=20 > I hope you're not seriously suggesting to censor a BIP because you feel it > is a bad idea. For the record, I think the idea of the bips repo being a pure publication platform isn't a good one and doesn't match reality; like it or not by accepting bips we're putting a stamp of some kind of approval on them. For example, I suspect I wouldn't be able to get a BIP for a decentralized assassination market protocol standard into the repository, regardless of whether or not it was used - it's simply too distastful and controversial f= or us to want to merge that. Would you call that rejection censorship? I have zero issues with us exercising editorial control over what's in the = bips repo; us doing so doesn't in any way prevent other's from publishing elsewh= ere. --=20 https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org --azLHFNyN32YCQGCU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXa8pWAAoJEGOZARBE6K+yO/AH+wUxpvTXtaUj4mj5UI4UTwpG xRbrCqmuZHp528PdtRemODDZVVpgqHhmbWC9AUc7ef6RMOJ25l5AmegZeLfFaX6U EX4JpZuoUeuSIX6kkVvhGA/uY9f+oUt6W1v18fVVuunorlZHO7RMJtaKYjebAhZa McEsnB1sA+uwduUNPdpPTmLgWjAHLdoTjauggZvWktA+47RuKi36RniLlj8JzRXg k24RUo5CCL7Jeb0yjnPumPTS0dTo2QGsJzCNAKGSixt1MkQ8XVabgbybtqBCyMFB H6MjYwpLBFRNstHwzHjb6Yt7yHzOwINbYHCPXSDdQVD/teYhG2X1zVHpwwmswd8= =knTL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --azLHFNyN32YCQGCU--