The below is an off-site archive of all tweets posted by @lopp ever

October 12th, 2016

@joshmh @TuurDemeester @ViaBTC Yep, no need for yet another round of rhetoric to go along with it.

via Twitter for Android in reply to joshmh

@BitcoinBelle @Piotr14Tra @timpastoor @el33th4xor @ryaneshea You can always create a @onename ID and link it to your twitter account

via Twitter for Android in reply to BitcoinBelle

@badslinky Yeah, they’re kind of a second economic layer above the technical layer.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to badslinky

@TuurDemeester I don’t think I’ve heard a unique block size argument in at least 6 months. Less repetition, more action.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to TuurDemeester

@el33th4xor Claim was that in conjunction they can be used to check any attribute of a txn; not sure of the details.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to el33th4xor

@Itnom You’re suggesting a stateless protocol that solves double spending?

via Twitter Web Client in reply to Itnom

Trust Disrupted: Bitcoin and the Blockchain (episodes 1 & 2) with @nathanielpopper youtube.com/watch?v=m1sBur…

via Twitter Web Client

@bergealex4 Right, from a macro view it’s not traditional governance so much as self-governance overlaps forming a usable network.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to bergealex4

@SooMartindale that would fall under devs aiding in bypassing vetoes

via Twitter Web Client in reply to SooMartindale

@bergealex4 From a micro / technical view, all nodes are equal. From a macro view, it certainly gets more complicated.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to bergealex4

3 branches of BTC “governance:”
* Full Nodes (can veto miners & devs)
* Miners (can veto devs)
* Devs (can help others bypass some vetoes)

via Twitter Web Client