Engineer

Paul Rosenberg predicted this in Breaking Dawn (2016). https://www.amazon.com/Breaking-Dawn-Paul-Rosenberg/dp/09… Think of it as Mandibles, but from the perspective of 1) people who have fled (or are fleeing) the major cities; and 2) the ruling elites. A caveat about the third part of the book: I found it interesting, but disappointing in terms of the plot. It is likely to annoy both atheists and Christians (in particular, but not exclusively).

> There are no sides...now here are the sides... 😂 The existence of a BIP necessarily creates sides. That doesn't mean either side is monolithic. It is possible to oppose spam while also opposing a particular proposed solution to spam. > it's incredibly stupid to judge BIP-110 because people you dislike are yelling It's not just random people yelling. It's the leading proponents. Seems like a red flag. And I didn't even dislike them prior to the yelling. > If you want civilized discourse you're really just asking for centralized decision making. If you believe this, I think you have failed to understand bitcoin (and free markets, and the entire history of western civilization).

Fair.

> But many people online are reasonable and understand nuance and context. Yes. Dozens of them.

Except that so many of the people mentioned have acknowledged the emails. If false, you would expect some denials. It's good to be suspicious, but don't over think it.

I thought that was just about foot-gun risk for wallets, nothing to do with the network. Am I wrong?

Your accusations could be much more effective if you linked to a source. All his Nostr posts and RHR episodes are public. Shouldn't be too hard, right?

I will take that as an apology. No hard feelings.

1. Get core devs to stay humble 2. Stop calling people who disagree with you pedophiles 3. 📝 7b405ff2…

I know this wasn't addressed to me, but... What I want is for both sides to stop trying to force their opinions on the rest of the network. Frankly, IDGAF about the technical merits of BIP110 as long as its leading proponents are behaving like lunatics. From what I have seen, it is your side that needs to apologize for making personal attacks before you can reasonably ask others to just focus on the technical merits. Until then, a plague on both your houses.

Agree, brevity is undervalued. But it's also possible to go too far in the other direction. People (some, at least) want to understand your reasoning too.

It will be announced in March, available in 2927.