pull down to refresh

I really like this article. You do a nice job of explaining things clearly and I really like where you take it. Blaming this on AI is definitely scape-goatism:

the reality is almost too mundane to believe.
Pointing the finger at “a complex and subtle series of bugs” (to quote their postmortem), or at AI (for assisting in discovery of the issue) is an abdication of responsibility.
This was a build flag that didn’t do what its author thought it did. Human error, hiding in plain sight.

And I especially appreciated the latter half of your article. I agree with this:

More people should’ve verified Coldcard’s code for themselves, absolutely. But have you studied the Bitcoin source code line by line? No? Then you’re trusting it, not verifying it for yourself. And that’s fine - for 99% of people, some degree of trust is unavoidable.

I wonder though if it wouldn't be better for Bitcoin if the expectation was that influencers who accept sponsorship money retain a little more objectivity. I've never been sponsored to do anything, so I can't quite say how it feels, but I'm sure there is a lot of pressure to refrain from saying negative things about the sponsors products. Hopefully this incident is so bad that influencers are more willing to be critical.

You cannot blame AI. AI isn't self-aware. It isn't "doing" things, humans are.

What you can state is that there is debt that was clearly not evident pre-AI and is becoming that now. Note that @Rob1Ham was talking about multiple vulns, not "found nothing". All that is debt.

reply

Thanks @Scoresby. I agree with you re objectivity, but I've never been sponsored either - my site's got no ads/affiliates etc.

I expect that fear of losing sponsorship (i.e. one's income) is partly why so many influencers / podcasters remained silent while nvk acted like a dick to others (as @raw_avocado said). Not excusing this - obviously he should've been held to higher standards - but it's easier for me to call out bad behaviour after his downfall than before.

reply

I hope you didn't read my comment as directing any criticism at you or your site. The site is excellent and it was not my intention. My comment about the expectation of influencers who accept sponsorship money retaining objectivity was aimed at the Odell's and Marty Bent's of this world, not at you at all. I'm terribly sorry if it doesn't read this way.

reply

No offence taken at all! I was just rambling and worded it badly. I get your meaning, and thanks for kind words.

reply
I wonder though if it wouldn't be better for Bitcoin if the expectation was that influencers who accept sponsorship money retain a little more objectivity.

Yes, and more humility and integrity. You don’t have to say things you don’t believe and you don’t have to believe what you’re told.

We’ve only ever had one small sponsorship and we were completely open about why we thought people should be cautious with them. If your sponsor has any integrity, they won’t mind that honesty. If they don’t, then…

reply