I’ll open my hash commitment next week. For those of you who want to pre-commit to predictions about the content of my commitment, now’s a good time 
6 Likes
Can you provide links to the quoted articles so we can do as you asked and read them?
I edited the post to contain links to relevant articles and video.
1 Like
If anyone’s interested, this opens the sha256 commitment:
you can verify by running https://pastebin.com/VWXHNGDN
TL;DR I’d go with A even though B has merit and nothing horrible will happen if B is picked.
I’ve been deliberately avoiding to weigh in on the topic of Babylon 2.0.1 because I think it’s important for the Tezos community to exercise its debating and governance muscles as much as possible. I am however pre-committing now to this short post so that it can be unsealed after a decision has been made.
The issue at hand boils down to a bug found in Babylon 2.0 during the testing period. The standard procedure in Tezos is to simply reject the proposal and, potentially, propose it again in the following phase. This has been dubbed “option A”. In addition, a non-standard approach was suggested, and has been referred to as “option B”. In option B, the Tezos shell is modified (requiring the coordination of all bakers) in a way that applies a hotfix to Babylon 2.0 should it pass the vote.
Before delving into my personal opinion on the matter, let’s get one thing out of the way: neither option spells doom or disaster. One option reinforces the stability of on-chain governance, the other saves valuable time at an important juncture of growing adoption. Reasonable people can weigh these pros and cons differently and reasonably disagree without being stupid or evil.
All things considered, I personally favor option A, despite B’s undeniable appeal.
The Babylon 2.0 proposal contains useful improvements to Michelson which change the way in which smart-contracts are developped. Introducing additional delays and uncertainty in the deployment of those changes can, in the short-run, negatively impact people building projects on Tezos. Option B has the merit of avoiding that delay with minimal disturbance to the on-chain governance process. For Babylon 2.0.1 to be activated under option B, it still requires a vote with an 80% supermajority. If that happens, it’s hard to make a serious argument that it fundamentally runs contrary to the will of the participants.
It is also the case that if the bug warranting Babylon 2.0.1 had been found after the activation of Babylon 2.0, it would have been patched with a shell update without raising any question as to the appropriateness of the procedure. It is a bit strange that catching the bug earlier rather than later can be, in a way, more problematic, but such is life.
So why favor A?
In a nutshell, I see A as a good memetic investment. The obvious short-term cost to A is the delaying of useful functionality, but the benefit is a long term strengthening of on-chain governance. I see the goal of on-chain governance as forming strong cultural norms and Schelling points around a decentralized process as opposed to a protocol set in stone. This adherence can only be demonstrated when adherence is costly when it represents a sacrifice. In the grand scheme of things that haved happened on blockchains, and smart contract platforms, in particular, this is not a particularly expensive sacrifice. There has to be a dose of irrationality in adherence to these norms for them to stick. B is the pragmatic choice, but I think we can get more mileage, in the long run, by picking A.
8 Likes
Pastebin link is dead, more permanently, here’s how to verify the hash:
#!/bin/sh
message=`echo -n "QlpoOTFBWSZTWbbswmsAAWBfgAAQUvdwWLUmnAA////wYAbfbKiX3fe3uOa7mTkGdjtTdsNAQmaj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" | base64 -d | bunzip2`
echo "$message"
echo "$message" | sha256sum
3 Likes
My message above contains its content
1 Like
