Thread

Code being open-source has nothing to do with preferences. Open-source implementations allow a free market of ideas an implementations, that does not mean you should agree on the idea behind all of them.

Of course and that’s the point.. you don’t need to agree but you can’t consider having more implementations to be an attack

You can in fact. Weird thing about freedom, you can have free people asking for less freedom. Quite common these days.

While he may not be explaining the whole game theory I can understand why he would say this. If the node software implementations become more fragmented it can leave the network vulnerable to attack by malicious actors. A unified front from core down would be ideal, however I think what needs to be addressed is how core is funded and managed. Very few Bitcoins have insight into this.

I can argue that it’s the other way around 1- having only one implementation made us get confused between what is consensus vs what is just an implementation spec. To a point that Core Devs can actually filter/control certain behaviors despite that not being in the consensus. Core is also somehow ruling what is going to be added even for future soft forks 2- with more implementations if one has a bug others will resist. Having only one implementation if there is a critical bug it’ll affect everybody So I’m in favor of having more diversity of opinions and software is somehow an opinion here

I don’t believe a second, compatible implementation of Bitcoin will ever be a good idea. So much of the design depends on all nodes getting exactly identical results in lockstep that a second implementation would be a menace to the network ~satoshi