Open source, as a concept, does not nullify the fundamental rights of the creator. It is a system of shared innovation, but it operates within the boundaries of respect for the originator’s vision.
To say that open source gives anyone the unbridled freedom to alter a system and still claim it as the original is to misunderstand and distort the very principles that underpin it. Open source is not a license to erase the identity of a creation or to steal the rights of its creator. It is not an anarchic free-for-all where property and authorship are dissolved.
The freedom to build upon an existing codebase does not equate to the freedom to strip that system of its integrity and then falsely claim that it remains what it once was.
Consider Linux, a well-known open-source operating system. The code is available to anyone, but that availability does not mean that anyone who modifies it can claim the name Linux for their derivative works if those modifications fundamentally alter the core of the system.
If someone took the software from the Linux Foundation, twisted its architecture to resemble FreeBSD, and radically changed the kernel, they would not be allowed to call it Linux.
The integrity of the original system must be preserved if it is to retain its identity. The open-source model does not grant one the right to deface a creation, distort it beyond recognition, and continue to claim it under the banner of the original creator.
To do so is fraud, a blatant misrepresentation of what the creation was meant to be.
Open source, in its purest form, recognises that while code can be shared, ownership of the original concept remains with the creator. There are principles that cannot be violated.
BTC Core never had the authority to make fundamental changes to Bitcoin’s protocol. Any claim by them that they possess such authority is not only a lie but a betrayal of the very foundation upon which Bitcoin was built. Their actions represent the theft of an idea, the hijacking of a system that was never theirs to alter.
They are attempting to do with Bitcoin what no one would dare do with Linux—to take something that is no longer recognisable as the original and pass it off as if nothing has changed. This is a violation of the most basic principle of honesty in creation.
The open-source model does not grant them this right. Just as with Linux, the core identity of Bitcoin must remain intact for it to retain its name and its purpose. To suggest otherwise is to advocate for intellectual theft. BTC Core’s changes, which have altered Bitcoin’s very structure, have made it into something else entirely.
They cannot rightfully continue to call it Bitcoin, for what they now manage is a false representation of the original system. The name carries weight because it is associated with the principles Satoshi Nakamoto established—principles of immutability, traceability, and decentralisation.
These principles have been violated, and in doing so, BTC Core has forfeited the right to claim the legacy of Bitcoin.
Open source does not abolish ownership; it respects it. It allows for collaboration within boundaries, for improvement and innovation, but never for usurpation. BTC Core developers crossed that line when they took it upon themselves to rewrite the rules of Bitcoin without authority.
Their claim that they have the right to do so is the ultimate deceit, a self-serving distortion of both open-source principles and the rights of the creator. Satoshi Nakamoto created a system that was intended to remain unchanged.
To allow others to alter it and still call it Bitcoin is not merely a violation of property rights; it is a moral perversion, an attempt to steal the intellectual legacy of another under the guise of open collaboration.
1/2
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 19, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1847612726853419182?t=xhjE_ixQaR4GKciEzAeUUA&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1518
To say that open source gives anyone the unbridled freedom to alter a system and still claim it as the original is to misunderstand and distort the very principles that underpin it. Open source is not a license to erase the identity of a creation or to steal the rights of its creator. It is not an anarchic free-for-all where property and authorship are dissolved.
The freedom to build upon an existing codebase does not equate to the freedom to strip that system of its integrity and then falsely claim that it remains what it once was.
Consider Linux, a well-known open-source operating system. The code is available to anyone, but that availability does not mean that anyone who modifies it can claim the name Linux for their derivative works if those modifications fundamentally alter the core of the system.
If someone took the software from the Linux Foundation, twisted its architecture to resemble FreeBSD, and radically changed the kernel, they would not be allowed to call it Linux.
The integrity of the original system must be preserved if it is to retain its identity. The open-source model does not grant one the right to deface a creation, distort it beyond recognition, and continue to claim it under the banner of the original creator.
To do so is fraud, a blatant misrepresentation of what the creation was meant to be.
Open source, in its purest form, recognises that while code can be shared, ownership of the original concept remains with the creator. There are principles that cannot be violated.
BTC Core never had the authority to make fundamental changes to Bitcoin’s protocol. Any claim by them that they possess such authority is not only a lie but a betrayal of the very foundation upon which Bitcoin was built. Their actions represent the theft of an idea, the hijacking of a system that was never theirs to alter.
They are attempting to do with Bitcoin what no one would dare do with Linux—to take something that is no longer recognisable as the original and pass it off as if nothing has changed. This is a violation of the most basic principle of honesty in creation.
The open-source model does not grant them this right. Just as with Linux, the core identity of Bitcoin must remain intact for it to retain its name and its purpose. To suggest otherwise is to advocate for intellectual theft. BTC Core’s changes, which have altered Bitcoin’s very structure, have made it into something else entirely.
They cannot rightfully continue to call it Bitcoin, for what they now manage is a false representation of the original system. The name carries weight because it is associated with the principles Satoshi Nakamoto established—principles of immutability, traceability, and decentralisation.
These principles have been violated, and in doing so, BTC Core has forfeited the right to claim the legacy of Bitcoin.
Open source does not abolish ownership; it respects it. It allows for collaboration within boundaries, for improvement and innovation, but never for usurpation. BTC Core developers crossed that line when they took it upon themselves to rewrite the rules of Bitcoin without authority.
Their claim that they have the right to do so is the ultimate deceit, a self-serving distortion of both open-source principles and the rights of the creator. Satoshi Nakamoto created a system that was intended to remain unchanged.
To allow others to alter it and still call it Bitcoin is not merely a violation of property rights; it is a moral perversion, an attempt to steal the intellectual legacy of another under the guise of open collaboration.
1/2
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 19, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1847612726853419182?t=xhjE_ixQaR4GKciEzAeUUA&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1518
Comments
Be the first to add a comment
Log in to comment