The white paper is the first-principles document. It is the blueprint: the design, the purpose, and the assumptions behind Bitcoin. Some of those assumptions turned out to be wrong; most did not. The assumptions that were wrong nevertheless helped shape Bitcoin into what it is today, and we can debate whether that is good or bad.
But the white paper still provides the rationale and context behind a pile of code that can otherwise be changed infinitely to do whatever its maintainers or users want it to do. Without the context provided by the paper, the code alone tells us very little about what Bitcoin was actually designed to be.
Login to reply
Replies (2)
Why not to start with new Genesis then? Why fork?
Wow, I strongly disagree with you on this.
The white paper is by definition not "first principles". At all. And I think reconsidering this might possibly lead you to reconsider other opinions as well, just based on how flawed I think this perspective is.
The IDEA of bitcoin seems to be founded deeply from first principles.
The white paper is an explanation of how this idea can be constructed and brought to life.
The actual code implementations then finally take the guidelines of the whitepaper to implement the idea in code-form, thus bringing it into our reality in terms of actually being able to use it.
When we then later decide to deviate from the whitepaper, if those deviations improve on project, where improvement is based on the first principles of the societal problems bitcoin seeks to solve, then those changes are (probably) good.
When the changes then show to have had negative side effects that outweigh the benefits, we must conclude that we were idiots when we implemented that change.
But the white paper in itself is not first principles.
Human rights are first principles.
Laws of physics are first principles.
Nature is first principles.
Bitcoin whitepaper is an idea. Thinking about