Nitesh @nitesh - 2h
If I were Biden, I'd start by learning how to walk.
Nitesh @nitesh - 3h
Going to get drunk after election results. Donald Trump is not my president.
Nitesh @nitesh - 4d
How did we all accept to paying for subscriptions and then watching ads? And it's even worse now, it's political ads! 😑
Nitesh @nitesh - 5d
I actually really like MKBHD's Panels wallpaper app now. After recent changes and fixes, it's really good!
Election day in 3 days, reminder that there is no red and there is no blue. It's always them vs you!
Nitesh @nitesh - 6d
Idk what to celebrate. Diwali or Halloween.
It already has happened. How do you think people get commit access to Bitcoin core? You contribute long enough to gain that power. I'm sorry, I don't think Saylor or some podcastors are qualified to hinder Bitcoin's development by cutting funding from development and not letting scaling happen. Its unacceptable imo just because those assholes have a lot of money invested in Bitcoin and yell on CNBC.
We already have this today in a way, only a few people have commit access to Bitcoin core repo. Have they done any harm so far? No. You're over thinking my proposal way too much. Every software project on the planet is lead by a set of people or a foundation. It's a natural thing to do, in Bitcoin's case it's still technically core devs but they have much less power in the sense that they're too scared to make any bold decision. All I'm saying is, we raise the pool of people who can be the "core" and then start enforcing better rules. All the code is public anyway, they cannot go do insane things like changing supply cap to 42m from 21m. It's all public.
I didn't say it's one person. I said a pool of people. It could be 100 people or 500. Soft forks don't need consensus of 1 million randos on twitter. It needs current and ex core devs, people who work on L2 protocols etc who we all know are qualified in making technical decisions. We have to figure out how to build a pool of qualified people, I'm only proposing how we approach core development going forward.
Not really imo. Getting opinions of people who aren't even qualified to give opinions is useless. I'm not advocating for a Vladimir Putin, but we need a small pool of people who can make sound technical decisions and get shit done. As the price keeps going up, we get more and more people into Bitcoin and all of them want to have a say in what happens inside of core and yet 99% of these people aren't even close to being qualified to having a say or opinion. You cannot sit and wait to make everyone happy. It's just not going to happen.
What?
Allowing so many Indians to begin with was a mistake. What else did Canada expect.
We need a new form of Bitcoin-core. - You propose a consensus change with a BIP and code to show for it. - Every consensus change should have a review period of max number of days (maybe like 200). - Have a pool of maybe 200 devs who are smart enough of review proposals. - Its the responsibility of the proposer to advertise their proposal and get ACKs. - Get enough tACKs in this window, then merge it. - Miners will eventually just upgrade and it'll get activated. - Stop involving finance people with software decisions. - No debates on twitter, they go nowhere. If people have issues, then show up to talks and debate it live. Make soft forks normal again.
Nitesh @nitesh - 7d
Yes, unfortunately I'm dependent on the mess.
I said bitcoin core the software. Not Bitcoin the network.
Who are scared to make any decisions. It's leaderless.
My hot take: Bitcoin core kinda sucks because it's decentralized. I prefer projects with leaders who can set the direction and make decisions.
Nitesh @nitesh - 8d
Good morning! https://image.nostr.build/28e572d08652b1b491804eae782b7ba6db3f177c17e4b9fa4947f5c6e96a17a4.jpg !
X's election algo is so messed up. It's not just posts, even replies to posts are just specific to right or left wing. If you support Trump or Harris, try liking a few posts favoring the opposite candidate. It'll totally mess with your head!
Tell her to show up***