> Because the process is not entirely deterministic, it is much harder for a bad actor to corrupt. As in software, a lack of determinism means a lack of reprod

> Because the process is not entirely deterministic, it is much harder for a bad actor to corrupt. As in software, a lack of determinism means a lack of reproducibility, and without reproducibility it's harder to have consensus. In particular, if bitcoin makes a rule change (or refuses to implement a rule change), such a decision lacks the transparency and accountability needed for good governance, because the bad actor can just say "Well, that's just how things worked out that time. Blame the RNG.". I don't think this is a theoretical concern when it comes to a bad actor corrupting the bitcoin protocol development process.