Developers don’t work for you

I have a feeling I’ll be writing a lot about this topic in general in the near future, but the philosophical and existential crisis currently facing the Bitcoin space over what constitutes “spam” has enormous second-order implications and consequences. Began to import . In every other Bitcoin community.

I’d like to focus specifically on the response to what could charitably be interpreted as a debate with core developers, but in reality it has in most cases taken the form of what can only be described as bullying. This is a very nuanced and nuanced aspect of how Bitcoin works, as the relationship between the “customers” who actually utilize Bitcoin and the developers who work to maintain, improve, and optimize the protocols and tools built on top of it is unclear. can. Cut out category separation. Many people who use Bitcoin are developers, and many developers are Bitcoin users. There is no clear line to distinguish between the two, and a person who is one or the other may, over time, become both. Likewise, people who fall into both categories may no longer do so and simply become developers or users. This is the first thing to understand. The boundaries between users and developers are completely arbitrary, constantly overlapping and with the potential for that overlap to grow or shrink at any time.

That is, what about non-developer users? What is your relationship with the people who actually write and maintain the software? I can’t give you a clear, black-and-white answer, but I can tell you what the relationship is and is not an employer/employee relationship.

Developers don’t work for us. full stop. They are not our employees. We do not pay their bills, we do not fund their work, and they have no contractual or legal obligations to us. We are not product managers, we do not give them a project roadmap and tell them what parts they will work on, how they will do it, in what order, what those parts should be and how they should work.

Let go of the idea that this ecosystem operates remotely in any way. It’s not like that. Developers are free to choose to invest their time in open source protocols entirely on their own terms. They decide how much time they will spend, what they will spend it on, and how they will actually implement the tasks they have chosen. full stop. They have complete and free autonomy in all respects regarding how they interact with Bitcoin as a project.

Now flip this over and look at the user. Bitcoin users are not obligated to adopt any changes or tools made by developers. There is nothing forcing users to change the software they run or developers to adopt new tools built on top of Bitcoin. Subscribing to Netflix doesn’t oblige you to watch a single piece of content they produce, nor does it oblige you to consume any specific amount of content. You can watch as much as you want and even cancel your subscription if you wish. Netflix literally has no control over how you interact with it, except through the purely voluntary force of persuasion.

This is how Bitcoin works. Harassing developers on GitHub doesn’t change the situation. Your relationship with a developer doesn’t magically turn into an employee/employer relationship. Howling on GitHub not only accomplishes nothing to create or bring about the power dynamics that many Bitcoin users seek to realize; It’s not productive for anything. As someone who has personally discussed numerous issues with developers over the years, I can tell you that I have argued many times that the developers are wrong about the problem or plan of action they think is most appropriate to take.

GitHub is not the place to debate the purpose or reason for Bitcoin’s existence. It is a place for discussion and criticism of narrow concepts and implementations. For the express purpose of improving whatever technical proposals are made.. This could result in the proposal being incorporated into Bitcoin or being rejected by Bitcoin. It must depend entirely on the results of rational and logical discussion..

Would you actually continue to contribute or participate in the development process on an ongoing basis, even if you had really reasonable arguments or opinions? Or are you essentially cycling through your review or input on a specific issue? yes? Then, even if you have a reasonable argument, GitHub is not the right place for such a discussion. There are tons of places to discuss and work toward consensus on things, including Twitter, Reddit, and Spaces. Without actively interfering with the development process with ridiculous philosophical debates about semantics..

And let me emphasize again that I am someone who spends an enormous amount of time in this space arguing why certain directions of development are or are not a good idea and reinforcing those arguments with real reasoning and logical evidence. I will probably never contribute to Bitcoin development in a meaningful or consistent way. So I don’t try to inject my arguments, opinions, or ideas directly into the development process itself..

When I communicate these claims to the broader community or to developers, I explain them in forums or mediums other than GitHub or other platforms with a specific purpose and function. developer Coordinate the development process. If my argument actually has merit, it will convince users. They will convince developers on places like GitHub. Eventually, arguments with merit will grow and build consensus around them to the point where they present meaningful public signals that developers can choose to incorporate, if they wish, into their own reasoning about Bitcoin and what they choose to spend their time and effort on. It will. We are working to improve.

Ultimately, it doesn’t matter whether you look at these problems and these dynamics from a developer’s perspective or a user’s perspective. There is no power or influence other than the power of persuasion.

If a developer is producing something that the majority of users don’t want or find value in, they can simply ignore it. If developers find a majority of users asking for something completely unreasonable in terms of incentive alignment, engineering reality, or something similar, they can simply ignore it.

Bitcoin is a self-regulating system. Bad tools created by developers will not be adopted. Users who ask for something inconsistent or harmful can’t force developers to build it, but they can step up and build it themselves. really I want that. In this dynamic, no one works for anyone else. This is a completely voluntary process regulated by market forces. So take it a step further and try to be really convincing, do it yourself, or just cry harder. Forcing someone to do something they don’t want to do will not succeed.

There’s a fork button here in the top right corner.