Published on: 2015-10-07T00:04:53+00:00
In an email conversation on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, Sergio denies using any four-letter words on IRC and questions the trustworthiness of IRC IDs. He requests Venzen to provide a link where an impostor said something to him in Sergio's name. Sergio expresses skepticism towards the characters mentioned in the email and considers them just regular people.The email conversation between Milly Bitcoin and Russ discusses the copyright notice of Bitcoin's code. Milly argues that the "copyright notice refers to the fact that each contributor owns copyright to his own contributions." However, Russ disagrees and explains that the legal owner is identified by the "c" in a circle (©). He cites Nolo and USPTO sources to support his argument. The conversation does not provide much detail on Bitcoin itself, rather it focuses on the copyright notice of Bitcoin's code and how it should be correctly displayed.On the bitcoin-dev mailing list, a proposal was made to implement dual modes in Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) 65. Some users support BIP 65, while others do not. The proposal suggests that both versions can run alongside each other and users can switch back and forth between them. However, additional constraints on transaction validation will be imposed to ensure that transactions made in a specific way will always look valid to non-CheckLockTimeVerify (CLTV) users but will require CLTV rules to be followed by CLTV users. SPV clients can choose to only connect to nodes which are non-CLTV. The discussion turned tense when some users resorted to name-calling, but eventually the proposal to implement dual modes was presented as a solution to the debate and the mailing list ended on a harmonious note.A new member of the bitcoin-dev community is reading through threads to educate themselves on the group ethos and etiquette. They found it difficult to understand some of the conversations, which may be intentional to maintain exclusivity. The new member wants to contribute their knowledge to the hardfork debate but is unsure if there is a more appropriate place to do so.Meanwhile, Mike Hearn supports a hard fork instead of a soft fork in regards to CLTV deployment. He believes hard forks are cleaner and have other desirable properties, while soft forks pose real financial risks. Despite controversy surrounding the consensus rules, Hearn predicts that Core maintainers will ignore it and do CLTV as a soft fork anyway.Venzen Khaosan challenges Mike Hearn to a public debate in Hong Kong. He accuses Hearn of being "too stupid" to handle client funds and the innovation behind Bitcoin, and promises to dismantle his "intellectual bankruptcy" in front of the world. Hearn had been raising objections to the implementation of CheckLockTimeVerify (CLTV) as a soft fork and argued that it should be implemented as a hard fork instead. Venzen Khaosan offers to debate an unnamed "eloquent guy" in the bitcoin community, stating that he will remove the person from their high horse and close their voice in Bitcoin for good. He mentions that he will go for the psychological throat first.The message is a response to Sergio Demian Lerner's post on Bitcoin-dev mailing list. The author accuses Lerner, along with Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn, of breaching consensus in the community. The author criticizes Lerner for not having an issue with Hearn's actions and suggests that this speaks poorly of him. The author also criticizes Hearn's bitcoinj code and accuses him of harming the public while working for the NSA. The author concludes by suggesting that Lerner should not speak for someone else and should instead speak for himself.The debate on whether or not to implement BIP65 in Bitcoin has caused discord among community members. However, a solution has been proposed that can satisfy both sides. By imposing additional constraints on transaction validation, transactions made in a specific way will always look valid to non-CLTVers but will not be valid for CLTVers unless the CLTV rules are followed. This way, both versions can run alongside each other and people can switch back and forth between them. SPV clients can choose to connect only to nodes that are non-CLTV. Some people have expressed disappointment and frustration with the childish behavior and name-calling in the discussion.In an email thread on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, Steven Pine accused Mike of being a "concern troll" and a bully. Milly Bitcoin criticized the use of the term "troll" as unprofessional and suggested using the word "cultist" instead. The term "concern troll" is often used to describe someone who pretends to be concerned about an issue to disrupt a conversation. Meanwhile, "troll" is a term often used to describe someone who deliberately posts inflammatory comments online. The conversation continued on the mailing list.In a discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, there was confusion over the terminology related to Bitcoin's Core developers.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T16:33:13.088651+00:00