Since when is it someone's fault for accepting an interesting job paying $400K a year? You could say it's the employer's fault for offering the job if the person isn't right for it, but to say it's that person's fault for taking it, come on, not taking it would make one at fault of being totally bonkers.
Discussion
I didn't write that it's exclusively her fault. If it wasn't her, it would've been another captured developer, so obviously her employer is at fault as well.
You are still responsible for your actions.
If I were offered to pilot an airplane but knew I wasn't qualified I'd decline the job offer.
If I accepted the job offer and crashed the airplane because I'm incompetent, would my employer be exclusively at fault, or would I carry some responsibility as well.
The same applies to ruining a mission-critical project such as Bitcoin. You aren't absolved of responsibility because your employer offered you a job without you being qualified.
And as I already wrote, it is mostly our own fault for allowing ~100% of nodes to run a single implementation for so long.
Sure, but flying an airplane is much more of a binary thing. Everyone on on a given plane wants pretty the same thing out of the ride.
Bitcoin, on the other hand, so many groups that each want different things from it, from every aspect of it. She could rightly conclude she's qualified under the demands of one of those groups, and so fair enough to her.
Yes, if the community cannot widely agree on what Bitcoin is (which seems to be the case), then she's not at fault and her employer is also not at fault. They just adopted the arbitrary data storage definition for Bitcoin so that's what they're optimizing for.
This is basically the coordination tax I wrote about in my last article.