[Bitcoin-development] On Rewriting Bitcoin (was Re: [Libbitcoin] Satoshi client: is a fork past 0.10 possible?)

Adam Back adam at cypherspace.org
Sat Feb 14 19:04:49 UTC 2015

Strongly with Peter on this.  That its highly complex to maintain strict
consensus between bitcoin versions, does not justify consensus rewrite
experiments; it tells you that the risk is exponentially worse and people
should use and rally around libconsensus.

I would advise any bitcoin ecosystem part, wallet, user to not use software
with consensus protocol rw-writes nor variants, you WILL lose money.

You could view bitcoin as a digital signature algorithm speculatively
tinkering with the algo is highly prone to binary failure mode and
unbounded funds loss.

Want to be clear this is not a political nor emotive issue. It is a
critical technical requirement for security if users of software people

Please promote this meme.

On Feb 14, 2015 6:24 AM, "Tamas Blummer" <tamas at bitsofproof.com> wrote:

> Peter,
> You did not address me but libbitcoin. Since our story and your evaluation
> is probably similar, I chime in.
> On Feb 14, 2015, at 2:13 PM, Peter Todd <pete at petertodd.org> wrote:
> So stop wasting your time. Help get the consensus critical code out of
> Bitcoin Core and into a stand-alone libconsensus library,
> We have seen that the consensus critical code practically extends to
> Berkley DB limits or OpenSSL laxness, therefore
> it is inconceivable that a consensus library is not the same as Bitcoin
> Core, less its P2P service rules, wallet and RPC server.
> On Feb 14, 2015, at 2:13 PM, Peter Todd <pete at petertodd.org> wrote:
> Or you can be stereotypical programmers and dick around on github for
> the next ten years chasing stupid consensus bugs in code no-one uses.
> The Core code base is unfriendly to feature extensions because of its
> criticality, legacy design and ancient technology. It is also a commodity
> that the ecosystem takes for granted and free.
> I honestly admire the core team that works and progresses within these
> limits and perception.
> I am not willing to work within the core’s legacy technology limits. Does
> it mean I am dicking around? I think not.
> It was my way to go down the rabbit hole by re-digging it and I created
> successful commercial products on the way.
> It is entirely rational for me to focus on innovation that uses the core
> as a border router for this block chain.
> I am rather thankful for the ideas of the side chains, that enable
> innovation that is no longer measured on unapologetic compatibility with a
> given code base, but its services to end user.
> Tamas Blummer
> Bits of Proof
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website,
> sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
> your
> hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
> leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
> look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150214/f093769e/attachment.html>

More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list