[BubRoss]

Part of it has been the tribalism of him going against the obvious weasels that ousted the original Bitcoin team to keep the blocksize low, the transaction fees high and get VC funding for their company that they would market by saying it was the 'people that were in charge of bitcoin'

Some of the people who hated those weasels decided that Craig Wright must be great since he says he is against the same people. Instead of everyone rolling their eyes and fighting an OBVIOUS con man interested in VC funding and patents some people thought everyone calling him a con man must be on the 'other side'.

Edit: If you think something is off, use your words. I can back up everything I've said here.

[jnbiche]

> Some of the people who hated those weasels decided that Craig Wright must be great since he says he is against the same people. Instead of everyone rolling their eyes and fighting an OBVIOUS con man interested in VC funding and patents some people thought everyone calling him a con man must be on the 'other side'.

That's an interesting summary of the situation, with parallels again to our current political situation.

[TeMPOraL]

As 'Eliezer summed it up perfectly:

"Politics is an extension of war by other means. Arguments are soldiers. Once you know which side you’re on, you must support all arguments of that side, and attack all arguments that appear to favor the enemy side; otherwise it’s like stabbing your soldiers in the back—providing aid and comfort to the enemy. People who would be level-headed about evenhandedly weighing all sides of an issue in their professional life as scientists, can suddenly turn into slogan-chanting zombies when there’s a Blue or Green position on an issue."

From: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/9weLK2AJ9JEt2Tt8f/politics-i....

[RustyRussell]

> Part of it has been the tribalism of him going against the obvious weasels that ousted the original Bitcoin team to keep the blocksize low, the transaction fees high and get VC funding for their company that they would market by saying it was the 'people that were in charge of bitcoin'

There are solid technical reasons to keep the block size low. The current developers were active almost from the beginning, you should take a look. And while Blockstream was founded by Bitcoin developers and sponsors development, it's a small part of the total development effort.

As an early Blockstream employee, I'd love to see some source to your claim that we "get VC funding for their company that they would market by saying it was the 'people that were in charge of bitcoin'"

[sct202]

Some of his supporters might just find him convenient for now. Like at work, sometimes I back people up who I don't really like or trust because at this moment they are doing something that is aligned with me, and it really isn't worth the effort to try to tear them down versus just going with it and dealing with them later if I have to.

[ChainOfFools]

is this the purportedly decentralized group that refers to itself, with no sense of irony, as Bitcoin Core?

[RustyRussell]

To clarify: the bitcoin open source project was renamed "Bitcoin Core" to avoid confusion with Bitcoin the currency and protocol (it didn't help).

It does seem to follow Open Source best practice: but I'm not even sure what "decentralized" development would look like?

[CydeWeys]

Bitcoin Core is the name of the software that was originally released by Satoshi Nakamoto and has been continuously been developed ever since. It is the most widely used software to interact with the Bitcoin blockchain, which makes sense, since at the beginning it was the only client and essentially the reference implementation.

The confusion stems from the fact that it was renamed at one point to make it clear that "Bitcoin Core" refers to this specific software whereas "Bitcoin" refers to the protocol and blockchain more generally. This distinction wasn't originally needed, as there were no other clients.