There is no point in bitcoin being censorship-resistant and distributed if the code is not.

- they can censor the repository because it is in a centralized service.

- They can censor, coerce, imprison and kill developers because many are not anonymous and use a centralized service.

The code is as important as the executable.

Make the code also uncensorable and distributed.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Well said! And this should also be the de-facto norm for any freedom-code going forward.

The system works by shock and awe, by making an example of some low hanging fruit in order to scare everyone else into compliance.

We need to set up an infrastructure where devs and business owners are free from fear and repercussions for non compliance.

It is the duty of every citizen to resist an unjust law

I also think that people nowadays are fighting an already lost battle, trying to find legalities, regulations (or avoid them) when the fight should be concentrated on: how to rebut any government claim over you, the living man.

Because there are ways, but seems that people are ignoring them.

Nobody is asking a simple question to any gov: please provide any proof, document, contract where you have any authority over me the living man or over my own money (Bitcoin).

THERE'S NONE.

But yeah, we endlessly debate with politicians and crap like that, that goes NOWHERE.

There is always good people in every sphere of society. The disregard of people taking their civic rights seriously is a big part of what led the US into such disrepair.

People MUST work locally unless we all fall into anarchy.

Besides that: how else is #btc going to be adopted & used by more without working with locals?

please define these two terms:

- civic rights

- anarchy

No. I’m not willing to defend what I said by proving my understanding of basic terminology.

Do whatever you want. People can have different opinions & remain respectful.

Anarchy - no governing authority or control. "without a ruler"

Civil rights are the fundamental rights and freedoms that every individual have inherent to being a human

Yes Darth, this is so so true. I see this all the time from people in my life, endlessly arguing about politics and governmental laws. Useless

Aren't the nodes making the code censorship resistant?

The code published at a given time, yes, but not its future development.

But people can choose not to update

you are misunderstanding me, we are talking about the software repository where bitcoin development runs.

The software repository is github which belongs to Microsoft, Microsoft can cancel the repository whenever it wants, Microsoft can provide the ips of the developers to the authorities, etc.

I think there are a lot of people that take it for granted that github isn't a vulnerability. I tend to write it off thinking that the devs would figure something else out when the time comes. Using github definitely doesn't fit with the ethos of "trust minimized"

🤔 ma fare una repository, magari chiamandola Gitnostr, all’interno di #nostr non sarebbe fattibile?

Ok, I see. Yeah, you're actually right about that 👍 If only there was a decenttalised alternative 😉

Code

Future development of code

Specific timed drips of data

Or thunderous clapping like …

When the saints come marching in ….

I need a lot of sleep 💤 but I’m sickly from the storms now

Worth listening this 1h video about how to deal with "jurisdictions".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQU-rstmq6U

Thanks! 🙏

Nailed it.

Finally honest rational discussion on here instead of blind Bitcoin worship.

How do you achieve consensus which is the correct code? ngit/gitworkshop.dev expects there to be one npub which is the "official maintainer" to follow. Then we're back to centralization.

Web of trust

I know Jack put up a huge bounty for this but not sure what ended up happening there.

As a worst case scenario couldn’t we just save snapshots to a bit torrent at least to minimize damage? Agree needs to be a long term solutions

OPSEC for developers is a much harder problem I would argue. There is an inherent tension between developing for open source + having your project get attention, while existing in a non-permissive environment.

I think your ultimate barrier to innovation is the current political overton window.

The more innovative, the higher OPSEC required, and the slower progress will be.

Everything in it's right time.