3 ms·

Why do they pander so much? It's hard to imagine pg ever writing something that tiptoes around like that, yet pg has been in dozens of situations requiring a p

Why do they pander so much? It's hard to imagine pg ever writing something that tiptoes around like that, yet pg has been in dozens of situations requiring a public response to a perceived problem. He's never pandered, yet he's never suffered for it either. So is pg just a better writer than Gavin, or is this an academic tradition, or...? Just curious.

celticninja 13y ago
no need to be combatative, he actually wants to encourage researchers to undertake this sort of work, it may lead to improvments in the protocol and could save the developers some time too. If he tore into them then other researchers may feel less inclined to look at the network/protocol and undertake their own research.
CompelTechnic 13y ago
I would say that it is probably because a large portion of the mainstream media/ general population thinks bitcoin is for complete loonies. If Gavin's tone were confrontational, it would likely make people think he's getting defensive over his obviously ridiculous magic internet money. He has to err on the side of caution to avoid people making that assumption.
jnbiche 13y ago
They're trying hard not to discourage academic research into Bitcoin, or to scare off security researchers. They desperately want more security researchers. I actually think Gavin is handling this very well, and the response seems well-measured. That said, the way this whole paper has been released smacks of sensationalism. I'll take the Eyal at his word that he's concerned with Bitcoin's future, but failing to adhere to the standards of responsible disclosure and entitling a blog post "Bitcoin is Broken" really make me wonder about what they're trying to do, other than self-promote. Besides, this basic attack is something that has been discussed since 2010. There may be a few subtle differences in the paper, but based on my reading of the blog post, this is an attack that mining pools have even accused each other of doing a year or two ago. It's a potential problem, but definitely not a "Bitcoin is fundamentally broken" problem as the blog post claims.

celticninja 13y ago

no need to be combatative, he actually wants to encourage researchers to undertake this sort of work, it may lead to improvments in the protocol and could save the developers some time too. If he tore into them then other researchers may feel less inclined to look at the network/protocol and undertake their own research.

CompelTechnic 13y ago

I would say that it is probably because a large portion of the mainstream media/ general population thinks bitcoin is for complete loonies. If Gavin's tone were confrontational, it would likely make people think he's getting defensive over his obviously ridiculous magic internet money. He has to err on the side of caution to avoid people making that assumption.

jnbiche 13y ago

They're trying hard not to discourage academic research into Bitcoin, or to scare off security researchers. They desperately want more security researchers. I actually think Gavin is handling this very well, and the response seems well-measured. That said, the way this whole paper has been released smacks of sensationalism. I'll take the Eyal at his word that he's concerned with Bitcoin's future, but failing to adhere to the standards of responsible disclosure and entitling a blog post "Bitcoin is Broken" really make me wonder about what they're trying to do, other than self-promote. Besides, this basic attack is something that has been discussed since 2010. There may be a few subtle differences in the paper, but based on my reading of the blog post, this is an attack that mining pools have even accused each other of doing a year or two ago. It's a potential problem, but definitely not a "Bitcoin is fundamentally broken" problem as the blog post claims.