I completely disagree. You can’t compare doctors to core devs. There are way more idiot doctors.
The number of expert bitcoin core devs is easily verified from the contributions and skill, especially when you have see their work up close like i have
Discussion
Just to play devils advocate, the whole point of the Knots peoples position is that core devs are compromised, so appeals to authority does nothing to sway them. You have to break it down and teach if the goal is to get people to change their opinion.
Right or wrong, the sentiment you shared is 100% ad hominem and 0% substantive argument.
so your “substantive argument” is that all core devs (including me i guess) is under a grand conspiracy to undermine bitcoin .
And mine is: domain experts actually know what they are doing. Which is an “ad hominem “ somehow
Ok bud 🙄
That's appeal to authority but if you're accusing the other person's opinion of being meaningless because they're not in your "expert" category, it's also ad hominem
You have me muted because you're a glowie, so I guess you won't see this
I don’t think you’re in on some grand conspiracy, but the fact you won’t consider (publicly at least) the issues that aren’t filter related is… 🤔
Is it that:
- You don’t want to risk your future Core contributions being rejected for not towing the line?
- You want to keep the argument centered on filters so it’s easy to dismiss Knots as stupid?
- You know something we don’t?
It doesn’t need to be that all Core devs are in on it. There’s enough concern just with Todd, Lopp and Citrea and the way it seems hastily forced through despite objections.
As I said before:
nostr:nevent1qqsvzg2s4kxcfntaj56mteaw0rnlrdqzzf8u05fgfypa5c876d2vfecpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqcqkv25
> You don’t want to risk your future Core contributions being rejected for not towing the line
this is a fundamental misunderstanding of how bitcoin contributions work. there is not some central authority that gatekeeps contributions. luke has controversial takes all the time, so do I and every other core dev.
we all disagree all the time. this is basic engineering. the point is to get rough consensus from subsystem domain experts.
Straw man. Not your argument.
>covered in its own feces
>struggles to tie shoes, evoking antisemitism, etc.
Not saying there’s a grand conspiracy. Just pointing out the efforts to educate as to why core > knots have been lacking.
also not true. this is the comprehensive answer that knots people have yet to reply to because they can't
So appeal to authority is correct when you appeal to the right authority?
I personally appeal to authority all the time when the person is the domain expert, like sjors on gui, gloria on mempool, sipa on basically everything. They just tend to have the most comprehensive view on a specific subsystem. Why would i consult some random person on twitter when they have no idea how these systems work
Incentives also play a role
Logical fallacies are indicators of poor reasoning or that the argument structure is not sound, but don't indicate that the conclusion is false.
It’s insane that whenever you suggest when someone actually understands subsystems well and you defer to them for guidance (things people do all the time in real life). People on here shout “appeal to authority!!”. They parrot this phrase without even thinking. What is your alternative? Ask your grandma instead? Is this the knots position? Its thats a fallacy then i will happily own it over appeal to retards.
solution for you is to back the fuck off.
#bitcoin works just fine and doesnt need your fat suburban thoughts mucking up its gears.
The gears will be mucked with; that’s the flaw of code.
you say that with a sense of fatalism, and also as if all ways of dealing with the code are the same - yet there are clearly other approaches that dont risk fucking yourself in the ass:
Correct, there are arguments worth making that are technically structurally unsound. Common misconception in critical thinking. Identifying a fallacy is not a winning argument in and of itself. Appeal to authority is only fallacious when the argument depends on it and the authority's (implied) argument is fallacious. It *can be* an indicator that the underlying structure is unsound, but not necessarily. It's like a dependency.
Brainless people can come up with everything. All kind of excuses. Even try to bend reality.
But in this particular case the main qustion is about TRUST, no matter doctor, dev or police.
I guess its not easy to lack brain capacity.
Lolol.
This is what you just said: “those experts are retarded while my experts are not.”
Appeal to authority is the lowest form of argument.