2 ms·

FWIW, Wladimir was fine in support of the work, see e.g. this discussion from a year ago: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core

by nullc 7y ago

FWIW, Wladimir was fine in support of the work, see e.g. this discussion from a year ago: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-03-07-19.01.log.txt http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitc... I didn't become aware of those snowden docs until a year and a half after the article about them... :( but the need was obvious enough before they came out (as you can see from the 2016 discussion on the subject). Sitting down and coding is probably not the limiting reagent in getting the work completed. Review, herding cats, building positive momentum, etc. would all add a lot if you're willing and able to provide it. Collaborating on a second implementation would probably also be useful (though not so much in isolation, but it would be useful for testing and validation). (Heck, even just cheering work along to distract from drama and haters would probably accomplish a lot).

sneak 7y ago
The Snowden drop was in 2013. A functioning implementation goes a long way toward herding cats and building positive momentum. Amongst hackers, working code trumps a lot of objections; moreso if it is simply opportunistic and doesn't break anything for old clients, and can be disabled by the fearful pedants. It's also a great starting point for other practical objections: with a working prototype, you can always counter "but what about edge case $x, huh smart guy?!" with a "well, here's a small patch to address $x, it's in the PR now", which is a great way to achieve forward progress.
- nullc 7y ago
  The edge cases should all be addressed by the spec. :P I don't recall any objections raised that would be addressed by code. (though also, there have been at various points in time implementations, just not merge ready ones...) In 2013 there were more serious privacy problems in the bitcoin software which probably would have made the encryption less relevant. Most of the known ones were addressed by 2016. I still didn't hear about the bitcoin tie in until Oct 2019, though, sadly.

by nullc 7y ago

sneak 7y ago

The Snowden drop was in 2013. A functioning implementation goes a long way toward herding cats and building positive momentum. Amongst hackers, working code trumps a lot of objections; moreso if it is simply opportunistic and doesn't break anything for old clients, and can be disabled by the fearful pedants. It's also a great starting point for other practical objections: with a working prototype, you can always counter "but what about edge case $x, huh smart guy?!" with a "well, here's a small patch to address $x, it's in the PR now", which is a great way to achieve forward progress.

nullc 7y ago
The edge cases should all be addressed by the spec. :P I don't recall any objections raised that would be addressed by code. (though also, there have been at various points in time implementations, just not merge ready ones...) In 2013 there were more serious privacy problems in the bitcoin software which probably would have made the encryption less relevant. Most of the known ones were addressed by 2016. I still didn't hear about the bitcoin tie in until Oct 2019, though, sadly.