pull down to refresh
223 sats \ 1 reply \ @optimism 23h \ parent \ on: Stacker Saloon
I've always formulated the censorship resistance solution the other way around from what Murch is saying: if you wanna include a tx that everyone wants to ban, use a direct submission bribe; the out-of-band submission is a feature, not a bug.
If miners wanna make money without morals, then so be it. If they wanna put jpegs or Trump pics on mempool.space, fuck them, they're retarded. They'll make mistakes thanks to their retardation in the long run and become obsolete. But "removing the incentive for private mempools" is an unreachable goal: there will always and should always be sidechannels. Because that is censorship resistance; the opposite of BIP-444. I can run a BitAxe for 2000 years and maybe it will mine my tx. Or I bribe a pool for 10k sats and actually have a reasonable few-hours-at-most timing. How much is speeding up 2000 years worth of waiting for a single tx to be confirmed to ya?
What I'm the most allergic to is the word "we". Fuck "we". "We" is what is causing the "war".
What I'm the most allergic to is the word "we". Fuck "we". "We" is what is causing the "war".
Did like the way @Murch explained it later on though. The only thing that I know based on my own FOSS experience that doesn't work is "loosely organized". With the only exception of a security maillist, you have to be either organized like you're a shitcoiner rugging people, or be not organized at all. The process is open, that's all that is needed.
Open processes are very well defined in Bitcoin Core, from
CONTRIBUTING.md to doc/release-process.md. If next time all maintainers are in a single spot and get taken out by some asshole with a bomb, anyone can continue the work, save for having bitcoin/bitcoin membership, third party tool like transifex control. However, with b10c's mirror scripts, bitcoiners can always move on, no matter what happens.reply