By Bitcoin Magasin - 4 måneder siden - Læsetid: 5 minutter
Udviklere arbejder ikke for dig
I have a feeling that I am going to be writing a lot on this topic in general for the foreseeable future, but the philosophical and existential crisis currently confronting the Bitcoin space over what constitutes “spam” is starting to have massive second order effects and consequences in all of the different Bitcoin samfund.
I want to specifically focus on the reaction to this debate spilling over into what charitably can be construed as debating with Core developers, but in reality in most cases has taken the form of what can only be called harassment. This can be a very nuanced and subtle aspect of how Bitcoin works, as the relationship between “customers” that actually utilize Bitcoin and the developers that work to maintain, improve, and optimize the protocol and tools built on top of it is not a clear cut category separation. Many people who use Bitcoin are developers, and many developers are users of Bitcoin. There is no hard line distinguishing between the two, and someone who is one or the other can over time become both. In the same regard people who fall into both categories could cease to do so, and simply become solely a developer or solely a user. That is the first thing to understand, the line between users and developers is totally arbitrary, with constant overlap and the potential for that overlap to grow and shrink at any time.
Når det er sagt, hvad med de brugere, der ikke er udviklere? Hvad er deres forhold til de mennesker, der rent faktisk skriver og vedligeholder softwaren? Der er ikke noget rigtigt sort/hvidt klart svar, men jeg kan fortælle dig, hvad forholdet ikke er: et arbejdsgiver/arbejdstagerforhold.
Udviklere arbejder ikke for os. Fuldt stop. De er ikke vores medarbejdere. Vi betaler ikke deres regninger, vi finansierer ikke deres arbejde, de har ingen kontraktlige eller juridiske forpligtelser over for os overhovedet. Vi er ikke produktchefer, vi giver dem ikke en projektkøreplan og dikterer, hvilke stykker de arbejder på, hvordan de arbejder på dem, i hvilken rækkefølge, eller hvad disse stykker overhovedet skal være, eller hvordan de skal fungere.
Disabuse yourself of any notion that this ecosystem functions in any way remotely like that. It does not. Developers freely choose to contribute their time to an open source protocol completely on their own terms. They decide how much time to spend, what to spend it on, and the way they actually implement what they chose to work on. Full stop. They have complete and unfettered autonomy in every way regarding how they interact with Bitcoin as a project.
Now turn that around to look at users. Users of Bitcoin are under no obligation whatsoever to adopt a change or tool that developers produce. Nothing is forcing users to change the software they run, or adopt a new tool developers build on top of Bitcoin. Having a Netflix subscription does not obligate you to watch a single piece of content they produce, it does not obligate you to consume any specific volume of content. You can watch as much or as little as you choose to, you can even cancel your subscription if you want. Netflix has literally no control over how you interact with it whatsoever except purely through the power of voluntary persuasion.
Dette er, hvordan Bitcoin works. Harassing developers on GitHub will not change that. It will not magically turn your relationship with developers into one of an employee/employer. Not only will crying on GitHub accomplish nothing whatsoever to create or bring about that power dynamic that many Bitcoiners seem to want to bring into existence, but det opnår intet produktivt overhovedet. Jeg siger, at som en person, der personligt har diskuteret adskillige problemer med udviklere gennem årene, hævdede adskillige gange, at udviklere er forkerte med hensyn til et eller andet problem eller en handlingsplan, som de synes er den mest passende at tage.
GitHub is not the place for arguing what the existential purpose or reason for Bitcoin existing is. It’s a place for narrow concept and implementation debate and criticism, med det udtrykkelige formål at forbedre det tekniske forslag, der fremsættes. Whether that leads to a proposal being incorporated into Bitcoin, or rejected from Bitcoin, bør være helt op til resultatet af en rent rationel og logisk diskussion.
Selv i det tilfælde, hvor du har et virkelig rationelt argument eller et stykke input, vil du så faktisk blive ved og bidrage eller deltage i udviklingsprocessen konsekvent? Eller kører du bare i det væsentlige ved at gennemgå eller input om et specifikt problem for at cykle det? Ja? Så selv med et rationelt argument i hånden, er GitHub ikke det passende sted for disse diskussioner. Vi har Twitter, vi har Reddit, vi har Spaces, vi har adskillige andre steder at debattere og arbejde hen imod konsensus om tingene uden aktivt at blande nonsens og filosofiske debatter om semantik ind i udviklingsprocessen.
And I reiterate that I am a person who has spent a massive amount of time in this space making arguments about why a specific direction of development is or isn’t a good idea, bolstering those arguments with actual reasoning and logical rationale. I probably never will in any meaningful and consistent way contribute to the development of Bitcoin, så jeg forsøger ikke at injicere mine argumenter, meninger og ideer direkte i selve udviklingsprocessen.
Jeg fremsætter disse argumenter til det bredere fællesskab, eller når jeg fremsætter dem til udviklere, i andre fora eller medier end GitHub eller platforme, hvis specifikke formål og funktion er til udviklere to coordinate the development process. If my arguments actually hold merit, they will convince users. They will convince developers out of band from places like GitHub. Eventually, an argument with merit will grow and create consensus around it to the point that it presents a meaningful public signal that developers can choose, if they want, to incorporate into their own reasoning around Bitcoin and what they choose to spend their time and efforts doing to improve it.
I sidste ende er det lige meget, om du ser på disse problemer og denne dynamik fra udviklernes linse eller brugernes linse: du har ingen magt eller indflydelse overhovedet, bortset fra overtalelseskraften.
Hvis udviklere producerer noget, som det overvældende flertal af brugere ikke ønsker eller ikke finder værdi i, kan de simpelthen ignorere det. Hvis udviklere finder et overvældende flertal af brugere, der kræver noget, der er fuldstændig irrationelt med hensyn til incitamenttilpasning, tekniske realiteter eller noget af den art, kan de simpelthen ignorere dem.
Bitcoin is a self regulating system. Bad tools produced by developers will not be adopted. Users demanding incoherent or damaging things cannot make developers build that for them, but they can step up and build it themselves if they virkelig vil have den ting. Ingen arbejder for nogen andre her i denne dynamik, det er en fuldstændig frivillig proces reguleret af markedskræfterne. Så enten gå op og prøv faktisk at være overbevisende, gør det selv, eller græd hårdere. Det vil ikke lykkes dig at prøve at tvinge nogen til at gøre noget, de ikke vil.
You can find the fork button in the top right corner right link..
Oprindelig kilde: Bitcoin magasin