pull down to refresh
I'm more around 3/4 way through. I agree that Bob seems pretty smart (as does Atack).
Bob said two things that may be relevant:
- He said that he signaled for many reasons, one of which was to remind people what it means to be a miner (not just a hasher). He said: when you are a miner and making your own templates you can signal, you can choose the transactions.
- There was some discussion of spam, and clearly Bob doesn't like it. This was tied to a conversation about whether filtering is censorship (I think it was Bob who said at one point that it wasn't censorship because he "didn't know who's transactions it was" and that it's more truly censorship when you target an individual, not a type). I wish they had gotten around to how filtering can seem a little like removing the neutrality from bitcoin, though. In my mind, filtering is entirely the choice of any miner or node, but it seems like it could just as easily be used to "filter" monetary transactions as it can (and is) used to filter technically repugnant transactions. I would have interested in listening to both of them explain how we will adopt filters to weed out transactions that "aren't monetary" but how we will also never do the same to "monetary" transactions.
So he's going to fork off then. After all, he signaled that he would. The 0x10 bit literally means "come September I am forking off even if everyone agrees to not do it". It's what the code says. Does he understand this? Because there is no walking back from that, not without being a signal saboteur. And sticking to it may be really, really dumb.
It sounds like the man sits in an echo chamber. And for someone that admits to being too old to have any runway left, maybe we should do him a favor and get him on SN. To at least also see the other perspectives on this.
I do think the "type" vs. "who" distinction is meaningful. that's a good argument
I put it on in the background and I thought a lot was reasonable, until Jon asked about datum being open source. You do not make promises to open source your software, you do not "intend to". You either do it or you do not.
So... now I think it's all just some dumb ass thing. Also, the guy that did the only BIP-110 signal is a smart guy. Does he know what he signaled from? Or did someone on the team downplay what the BIP does?