Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3D59125F for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 12:23:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-ig0-f171.google.com (mail-ig0-f171.google.com [209.85.213.171]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D224A142 for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 12:23:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by igcrk20 with SMTP id rk20so15812210igc.1 for ; Fri, 02 Oct 2015 05:23:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=vinumeris.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=7hIeXMOumCBTMfY5PB1MQYd6xYN0nvY0aiEqktSxmuk=; b=Hrbs12ZdQF+GboJErt1Qv+hoJfcpmrsOcsbDdqqRQfEo7XHzZgpp2Kcr1ck1lN357k B2YpcedZy1qPr186G9bBJ3W0NX6x0IRQJef18KH9wboa+YBYsXLFWXrJHTTAkFvbTvIo 7vpg8veLAE+AooAx5+5xTKMK+0SNwmIYMF9kU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=7hIeXMOumCBTMfY5PB1MQYd6xYN0nvY0aiEqktSxmuk=; b=fxAgeH1u3Re5RSSojkBvk82TprWy+cr+9RRK23BP+yDVcfGW2l8BKQmUAr+EcaunLC LHel3iqltZnghhfDUy51MaN7f78zknnhg09Ta8+8osHRocY9QG4zOyJwUvyA6JzLJxjC j4XS4boihZm07r0rfxFxMuSOAeendu1UmTMnd6s9AxwJSJFVmWvLqS4BfgbTLmyTd1if ClbHZGM1g0ZysT7ywkhrkCHNBZMgkPOOWKhvi4zVKx+YaOH6xMriIe+jk6dI/MDFRz2V +beCQQI/29zacZSvxopcA5p4VOXYaQsZoHpaowanFVYkiNENS/374mecR9uhYIQya5nZ wD0A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmEY4PrCW33HGvcN3XMvTitruLQfpgsryj0EgP31QlZamf8512MfhLhTl79o6WZQbYi7MMe MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.66.197 with SMTP id h5mr3840357igt.69.1443788597124; Fri, 02 Oct 2015 05:23:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.50.123.166 with HTTP; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 05:23:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20150927185031.GA20599@savin.petertodd.org> Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 14:23:17 +0200 Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Jeff Garzik Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bd6be0e7681b205211e3a24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HTML_MESSAGE,PLING_QUERY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Crossing the line? [Was: Re: Let's deploy BIP65 CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY!] X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 12:23:18 -0000 --047d7bd6be0e7681b205211e3a24 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable FWIW the "coining" I am referring to is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D7972.msg116285#msg116285 OK, with that, here goes. Firstly some terminology. I'm going to call these things SPV clients for "simplified payment verification". Headers-only is kind of a mouthful and "lightweight client" is too vague, as there are several other designs that could be described as lightweight like RPC frontend and Stefans WebCoin API approach At that time nobody used the term "SPV wallet" to refer to what apps like BreadWallet or libraries like bitcoinj do. Satoshi used the term "client only mode", Jeff was calling them "headers only client" etc. So I said, I'm going to call them SPV wallets after the section of the whitepaper that most precisely describes their operation. On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > To reduce the list noise level, drama level and promote inclusion, my own > personal preference (list admin hat: off, community member hat: on) is fo= r > temporal bans based on temporal circumstances. Default to > pro-forgiveness. Also, focus on disruption of the list as a metric, rath= er > than focusing on a specific personality. > > I do think we're at a bit of a point where we're going around in circles. > > Given the current reddit hubbub, a bit of a cooling off period is IMO > advisable before taking any further action. > > > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 12:08 AM, Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Dear list, >> >> Mike has made a variety of false and damaging statements about Bitcoin, >> of which this is but one: >> >> On Sep 30, 2015, at 2:01 PM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev < >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> >> I coined the term SPV so I know exactly what it means, and bitcoinj >> implements it, as does BreadWallet (the other big SPV implementation). >> >> >> On his website Vinumeris.com he writes: >> >> Vinumeris was founded in 2014 by Mike Hearn, one of the developers of th= e >> Bitcoin digital currency system. >> >> >> On plan99.net there are several embedded videos that refer to him a >> =E2=80=9Ccore developer=E2=80=9D of Bitcoin. And now it seems he is clai= ming to be Satoshi. >> >> It seems to me that Mike=E2=80=99s emails, false statements (like the on= e above >> about coining SPV), arguments, and his attempts to steal control of Bitc= oin >> via the contentious Bitcoin XT fork, represent actions that have been >> harming and dividing this community for several years now. >> >> In many communities/tribes, there exists a line that, once crossed, >> results in the expulsion of a member from the community. >> >> So, two questions: >> >> 1. Does the Bitcoin-devs mailing list have such a line? >> 2. If so, does the community feel that Mike Hearn has crossed it? (I >> personally feel he has. Multiple times.) >> >> Thanks for your thoughts, >> Greg Slepak >> >> -- >> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharin= g with >> the NSA. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >> >> > --047d7bd6be0e7681b205211e3a24 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
FWIW the "coining" I am referring to is here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D7972.msg116285#msg116285


OK, with that, here goes. Firstly some terminology. I'm g= oing to call these things SPV clients for "simplified payment verifica= tion". Headers-only is kind of a mouthful and "lightweight client= " is too vague, as there are several other designs that could be descr= ibed as lightweight like RPC frontend and Stefans WebCoin API approach
<= br>
At that time nobody used the term "SPV wallet&quo= t; to refer to what apps like BreadWallet or libraries like bitcoinj do. Sa= toshi used the term "client only mode", Jeff was calling them &qu= ot;headers only client" etc. So I said, I'm going to call them SPV= wallets after the section of the whitepaper that most precisely describes = their operation.

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Jeff Garzik &l= t;jgarzik@gmail.com<= /a>> wrote:
To= reduce the list noise level, drama level and promote inclusion, my own per= sonal preference (list admin hat: off, community member hat: on) is for tem= poral bans based on temporal circumstances.=C2=A0 Default to pro-forgivenes= s.=C2=A0 Also, focus on disruption of the list as a metric, rather than foc= using on a specific personality.

I do think we're at= a bit of a point where we're going around in circles.

Given the current reddit hubbub, a bit of a cooling off period is = IMO advisable before taking any further action.


On = Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 12:08 AM, Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev = <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
Dear list,<= /div>

Mike has made a variety of false and damaging stat= ements about Bitcoin, of which this is but one:

On Sep 30, 2015, at 2:01 PM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev <bi= tcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
I coined the term SPV so I know exactly what it means= , and bitcoinj implements it, as does BreadWallet (the other big SPV implem= entation).

On his w= ebsite Vinumeris.com= =C2=A0he writes:

Vinumer= is was founded in 2014 by Mike Hearn, one of the developers of the Bitcoin = digital currency system.

On plan99.net=C2=A0there are several embedded = videos that refer to him a =E2=80=9Ccore developer=E2=80=9D of Bitcoin. And= now it seems he is claiming to be Satoshi.

It see= ms to me that Mike=E2=80=99s emails, false statements (like the one above a= bout coining SPV), arguments, and his attempts to steal control of Bitcoin = via the contentious Bitcoin XT fork, represent actions that have been harmi= ng and dividing this community for several years now.

<= div>In many communities/tribes, there exists a line that, once crossed, res= ults in the expulsion of a member from the community.

<= div>So, two questions:

1. Does the Bitcoin-devs ma= iling list have such a line?
2. If so, does the community feel th= at Mike Hearn has crossed it? (I personally feel he has. Multiple times.)

Thanks for your thoughts,
Greg Slepak

--<= /span>
Please do not email me anything that you are n= ot comfortable also sharing=C2=A0with the NSA.


= _______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
= bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail= man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev



--047d7bd6be0e7681b205211e3a24--