Thread

Replies (34)

I read your recent article on ossification. Thanks for that insight, very educating. I had a question, and hear this from a perspective of me simply just trying to understand. Is there a definitive process to β€œdeclaring” ossification? Or is it something that just gradually happens over time? It would seem (based on my understand, or lack thereof) that the protocol will ossify naturally when it is ready to. Am I understand that correctly?
I'm not a Bitcoin dev, but I've built software tools for people and can code. Everyone knows that the systems like these always needs tweaks, vulnerability fixes, etc. Maybe I'm misreading, but my read is that responsible development should kind of follow a similar mantra to "first, do no harm".
I too find it strange that people here are mischaracterizing what Saylor is saying and seem to prefer personal attacks rather than discussing the issues. β€œSaylor hates devs!” β€œSaylor is a spook!” β€œYou’re a Saylor shill!” β€œSaylor wants to break bitcoin!” πŸ™„ It’s like I fell into bitcoin middle school. I’m hoping we can start thinking critically again.
Exactly, in Corporate America the really bad outsourced IT resources (for decades it was India) were held to a totally different quality standard. My entire career I'd lie in bed awake hoping I didn't break something with my latest patch, upgrade, etc. These guys were paid to essentially break things then hand the breaks to another outsourced "Production Support" group under the same umbrella. Huge money to be made in prolonging the solution. These guys just put in garbage and wouldn't fix things most of the time and break way more than they fixed. We called it, "Fix Something, Break Something." I am all for giving money to the right projects and people. That detail needs to be flushed out is all, down to the names and those individuals motivation to add to Bitcoin. Are they pushing the BIP to benefit for themselves from: Ordinals/Inscriptions/Stamps/Ruins?/<Flavor of the Month SPAM>
I would understand these attacks better if Saylor was trying to get some personal business advantage. Based on my read of the situation, Saylor just doesn’t want devs to screw up the base protocol. ODELL implied that funding was offered but with β€œstrings attached”. That apparently was unacceptable to these folks on nostr so hence the personal attacks and chaos that polarized and set the community against each other.