pull down to refresh
120 sats \ 20 replies \ @theariard OP 14 Nov 2023 \ parent \ on: Taking a sabbatical from Bitcoin FOSS meta
Feel free to show me your contributions to Bitcoin.
Social contributions will do more than code updates ever could.
All heroes will be killed.
Good luck with your hedge fund. Try not to end up in fincen prison
reply
I’ll wait you for you telling me if a security disclosure is a social contribution or a technical one, like a code update, in a constructive and argumented fashion.
In my opinion, security disclosure are social contributions, as they’re setting risks standards among the Bitcoin ecosystem.
On the fincen prison, if you don’t know it already, I’ll inform you than writing and publishing bitcoin code is protected under the First amendment by US federal courts and running a hedge fund is protected as a commercial activity under the “Commerce Clause”.
reply
Social contributions will do more than code updates ever could.
interesting take, can you elaborate?
writes this and then joins the mess, lol
reply
Because we don’t really need anymore “upgrades”
Social contributions fuel adoption.
reply
Because we don’t really need anymore “upgrades”
Also interesting take
And you were using the past tense:
than code updates ever could
I think fixing some critical bugs in the early days was a necessary condition for social contributions to even start
Social contributions fuel adoption.
With this I can somewhat agree, I guess.
reply
If we wouldn't use and teach others how to use Bitcoin, all that code and software built were for nothing.
In all these 10+ years I onboarded hundreds of people and helped many merchants to start with Bitcoin.
As I said, each participant in the network have its own role. Without his coding, all these people will not be into Bitcoin. That's a fact. Only writing code for Bitcoin is NOT enough.
reply
Only writing code for Bitcoin is NOT enough.
Yes, I don't disagree. I just didn't see good arguments so far why social contributions should be more important than technical stuff like coding, reviewing, testing etc.
reply
It’s chicken or egg.
Goes back to base case for peer to peer electronic cash.
If people do not see the problem with fiat government money then it doesn’t matter how functional Bitcoin is.
reply
Maybe my point is this:
Technical contributions create an upper limit for adoption.
Social contributions fuel adoption, but only until this limit is reached.
Then we need upgrades again like channel factories, easier (and actual) lightning backups, some
OP_VAULT implementation for even more secure onchain funds, a lot of UX stuff ...reply
Sure. We cannot stop where we are right now. We have a long way to go with many things to improve the code and create more solutions.
So many things have to be built and used.
Quitting right now is not an option.
reply
deleted by author
reply
deleted by author
reply
deleted by author
reply
Prompt decline cancel request
reply
deleted by author
reply
He's already quitting. Why bother ?
reply
that moment when you feel like you want to step in but at the same time, you also don't because you don't want to treat this "primitive" thread (people calling each other out and it just gets less and less constructive) any different than any other "primitive" thread on here; potentially just because this one involves @theariard for which i have great respect; so you don't step in and let them fight it out because we don't have and don't want a moderation policy but you still feel like writing something so you write this
reply
Nobody deny or not recognize his work on Bitcoin code.
My comment was only about his quitting rage, in the "hearn style".
A quitter is showing weakness. Weakness means cowardice.
Bitcoin is far more than personal feelings. If he put his personal feelings before Bitcoin greatness, that means he wasn't into Bitcoin for a greater good. And that's why he's now a quitter (like Mike Hearn)
reply
tbh, to me, it didn't sound like "quitting", more like "moving on" or "taking a break"
reply
deleted by author
reply