Re: [bitcoin-dev] Taproot activation meeting 2 - Tuesday 16th February 19:00 UTC

["David A. Harding" <dave@dtrt.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2448 bytes --]

On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 12:43:57PM +0000, Michael Folkson via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> https://old.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/lcjhl6/taproot_activation_pools_will_be_able_to_veto/gm2l02w/
> [...] 
> F6) It is more important that no rules that harm users are deployed
> than it is that new useful rules are deployed quickly. If there is a
> choice between “faster” and “more clear that this isn’t a mechanism to
> force bad things on users” we should prefer the latter. Plenty of
> people just don’t like LOT=true very much absent evidence that miners
> are blocking deployment. To some it just feels needlessly antagonistic
> and distrusting towards part of our community.

I think F6, above, bundles together several of Maxwell's points and
maybe loses something in summary.  I'd encourage interested readers to
view the original post that Folkson referenced.  I'd like to extract one
part as a separate point and write about it a bit in my own words:

F7) defaulting to LOT=false makes non-activation possible even if people
    run the code that developers provide, meaning a successful
    activation proves that at least some people (e.g. miners or UASFers)
    voluntarily took actions that were well outside the scope of
    developer control.

    This makes it clear that developers don't control changes to the
    system.  There are other arguments that demonstrate that developers
    aren't in control[1], but they aren't as clear as simply pointing
    out that a rule change won't go into effect until at least several
    non-developers independently act of their own accord.

    Having such a clear argument that developers aren't in control
    bolsters the decentralized ethos of Bitcoin and reduces the chance
    that bad actors will pressure Bitcoin developers to attempt future
    unwanted changes.  

-Dave

[1] IMO, the main evidence we have that developers aren't in control of
    the system is that Bitcoin Core is free software which gives anyone
    who obtains a copy of it the legal right to run it, learn from it,
    modify it, and share additional copies of it for any purpose.  Each
    time someone uses those rights to create alternative Bitcoin
    implementations, altcoins, or forkcoins, they demonstrate that users
    could change the system---or resist changes to it---in opposition to
    the current developer team, should that become necessary.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]