Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on Today at 12:24:43 PM

It's here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=770.msg9074#msg9074

Quote from: dkbit98 on Today at 12:29:37 PM

Here is the link for post made by Satoshi:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=770.msg9074#msg9074

Thanks.

Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on Today at 12:24:43 PM

Was P2SH necessary? Was SegWit? Is Taproot?

I haven't read what's Taproot yet, besides the known fact that it it helps with privacy, but aren't all those you mentioned soft forks? How do you vision a protocol change that would make Bitcoin transaction outputs interchangeable? Wouldn't we have to move onto implementations like ring signatures that would create hard forks?

Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on Today at 12:24:43 PM

is that the community can decide to change things

Who exactly is the community? This forum? The developers? The miners? The majority of its users? I think that in Bitcoin, the word “community” is highly abused. How can one define what's the community on a consensus based system?

Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on Today at 12:24:43 PM

Why? Taproot is a privacy improvement and will not affect existing wallets at all.

I'll skip the Taproot part, because as I said, I'm unaware. What solution do you propose that will make Bitcoin fungible, but won't affect the already existent wallets? With ring signatures, they'd have to change.

Quote from: dkbit98 on Today at 12:29:37 PM

Saying no to privacy for Bitcoin, while supporting other privacy oriented altcoins... Roll Eyes

What's wrong with altcoins?