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 15CA01CA9 for ; Mon, 21 Sep 2015 11:45:47 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail.help.org (mail.help.org [70.90.2.18]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A8848B for ; Mon, 21 Sep 2015 11:45:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.1.10.25] (B [10.1.10.25]) by mail.help.org with ESMTPA ; Mon, 21 Sep 2015 07:45:38 -0400 To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org References: <55FF3878.4060501@bitcoins.info> From: Milly Bitcoin Message-ID: <55FFEDE5.6040508@bitcoins.info> Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 07:45:41 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Bitcoin conference micro-report X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 11:45:47 -0000 On 9/21/2015 1:04 AM, Corey Haddad via bitcoin-dev wrote: > If it turns out that the blocksize divide is hinging on differing > developer views on the nature of the threat posed by governments, > perhaps it would be better to defer to people who specialize in that > area. ... ... > The main idea here is that if this is a politics question, please > consider you may be outside your area of expertise. That is a great suggestion. Jerry Brito is the number one guy to go to for this information. You will find that many early Bitcoiners are completely clueless as to the motivations of regulators. However, you still have the problem that some influential developers know Bitcoin but otherwise are completely ignorant. They will go around claiming everyone who discusses regulation is a "statist" and so forth. Some people on this list actually claimed I am "statist" simply by pointing out that governments do both good and bad things and that most people trust and depend on governments to a certain extent. That is simply a fact, it does not support any agenda. Another example are the developers who are going around claiming a stress test is a criminal action against those running nodes. Such a claim brings all kinds of complicated legal questions about the liability of people running nodes. Instead of contacting someone who researched the issue (such as Peter Šurda who ended up posting several sensible replies) the developer posted some hyperbolic article on Reddit which did nothing but promote misinformation. On top of that it makes Bitcoiners look totally ridiculous. One day they claim Bitcoin will collapse all these government institutions and the next day they want those same government institutions to arrest people for overflowing their memory pool. One final issue about the conference ... the developers should not be accepting advertisers engaged in nefarious activities. In particular BicoinTalk was accepted as an advertiser. It is well known that site has promoted fake banks where many users lost money (CoinLeders/Inputs.io), illegal investments schemes where,any people lost funds (BLBSE) and whole host of questionable, illegal, immoral, and unethical activities. Just because the guy who runs the site wrote a block explorer that does not mean the developers should blindly promote a highly questionable web site that damages Bitcoin's reputation. The people running these events need to start acting responsibly. Russ