pull down to refresh
359 sats \ 7 replies \ @k00b OP 9 Jun \ on: CTV + CSFS: a letter to the technical bitcoin community bitcoin
Something about this rubs me the wrong way. Shouldn't the people signing prioritize rigorous review and activation planning rather than assigning work to people that don't work for them? Maybe that's already been done?
If that's the case, maybe ask specific folks for review/involvement so that this doesn't suffer from a bystander effect and people don't continue to cry "why isn't anyone helping? Core isn't doing their job (which I define as them doing what I want when I want it)."
It's kind of weird to imagine people treating Core devs as badly as they treat normal open source devs, having had some experience with that, but I actually think they get treated much worse. Not only do people act like Core devs are their unpaid employees, they think they're their unpaid employees on something really important.
Some of the people among the signatories were pushing "
OP_CAT or gtfo" not many months ago. I've been in calls with a handful of them that were seeking support for their "cause". With the exception of literally a single soul among them, none would even entertain any arguments about Rusty's GSR proposal or CSFS back then. "It's inferior to OP_CAT". But now it isn't. I can't help but feel that for some of the people on there, this is just another lame pressure tool to get the Bitcoin protocol to change to support their vision."Core isn't doing their job"
I actually think [Core devs] get treated much worse.
True, but feature, not bug. Ultimate scrutiny is preserved for those that have out of proportionate influence. The only way I can think of that to lessen is when the full node ecosystem decentralizes away from being 95%+ Bitcoin Core, but I am not sure if that is desirable (because split focus sucks and it also really had the worst possible outcome for the lost cousins over at BCH (chain fork upon chain fork), so history doesn't favor this either.)
Not only do people act like Core devs are their unpaid employees, they think they're their unpaid employees on something really important.
The misplaced illusion of entitlement is of course terrible, but that's been common in open source since forever.
reply
Shouldn't the people signing prioritize rigorous review and activation planning rather than assigning work to people that don't work for them?
Third party review is required. Not just review from people who have an interest in the outcome.
reply
reply
Core devs are their unpaid employees
Core devs in most cases are very highly paid NGO operatives employees
But players need the AstroTurf rolled out first, seems the field is almost ready
reply