Like that waste of skin has even bothered to try reading it.
It is not "worship" to respect the original intent and operational theory of the Bitcoin whitepaper and not approve when a group of complete jackasses throws it away to re-engineer Bitcoin into something it was never supposed to be. Most here know the whitepaper isn't an end all be all blueprint when it comes to implementing the paper in real software, which of course comes with its own challenges and compromises.
Go ahead and show me where the paper said "then in a few years, throw away this paper and turn Bitcoin into an ICO for a privatized layer on top of the base protocol, which should be crippled deliberately".
That's clearly implementation detail. Nobody would include that kind of stuff in a technical whitepaper.
If Satoshi had chosen 42 million coins and doubled the block rewards, Bitcoin would be exactly the same.
Yes, it's supposed to be "chain with most accumulative proof of work". Seems more like a small mistake than anything else. The fundamental principle behind looking for the longest chain doesn't really change -- just how to determine more accurately which chain is truly "longest" (not literally counting the number of blocks)
From the perspective of Bitcoin, that's not fundamentally different from CPU power.
The chain goes like this:
Flexible -----> efficient
CPU -> GPU -> FPGA -> ASIC
All of them can perform the same calculations.
It's true for any program that if its small, doesn't get regular updates and requires super high performance that ASICs will be made for it.
Also implementation detail.
I don't think it's totally off-limits to change difficulty adjustment.
Bitcoin script or smart-contract system
This is probably the most valid one.
There's no clear position on this topic in the whitepaper, and it's debatable whether it's good for Bitcoin to have operations beyond the ones that support regular payments.
Mow is an idiot. Clearly he hasn't understood that it is not about blind worship of the whitepaper. It is about what works, and the original Bitcoin design WORKS.
Everything else he says is just one big shilling for Blockstream Coin (BTC) and sub-sequent fractional reserve banking. I am staying away from BTC.
I guess this is targeting the BCH crowd. If you read their subreddit once in a while, they quote satoshi's emails as much as the white paper, so it seems a bit misleading saying that people only care about the white paper.