Whaha, I've been in DC more often than Odell and I'm a foreigner.

Fountain

Citadel Dispatch • CD158: STEPHEN POLLOCK - BITCOIN POLICY INSTITUTE AND FREE SAMOURAI • Listen on Fountain

Stephen Pollock is the SVP of Development at the Bitcoin Policy Institute. BPI is the leading bitcoin focused think tank in the United States. We d...

View quoted note →

Removals after removal are my favorite type of removal. And I have a PR on top of this that removes even more :-) #MakeBitcoinCoreMaintainableAgain View quoted note →

There seems to be genuine confusion about how open source works. In particular some people believe that Bitcoin Core developers have a fiduciary duty, either towards them personally or towards some general notion of the Bitcoin network. They are surprised that I and some others respond to this rather aggressively. Remember that this is the argument Craig Wright tried to make. He failed, but not after millions of dollars were burnt on defending these developers. And not after several quit because of the stress. Don't go down this path. To put it as a catchy phrase: open source means you can do whatever you want with the code, not with the people who write it. Open source lets you fork code, and modify it to your liking. That's pretty much what I do every day, which isn't to say that I don't also try to make sure other people like it. I get paid in Bitcoin and OpenSats keeps their whole treasury in it, so the idea that I want destroy potential future income is rather retarded. Part of CSW's demands was that Bitcoin Core wrote specific (confiscation) code for him. Eventually he just hired people to write it for him, as one should, but somehow that still wasn't enough for him. I get a very similar vibe from people who run Knots but yet don't find that enough. Should we worry about a new round of lawsuits?