So, to expound my view on the 'bomb' topic (and why I voted against it) a little:



I don't think a bomb is a responsible device to use in the leading cryptocurrency, because it is by design not fail-safe, and I think Bitcoin software should always degrade safely rather than catastrophically.



I think people will, in the course of time, depend on Bitcoin, in some cases with their livelihoods and ultimately, that means lives. To build a device into the software that could ultimately jeopardize lives doesn't feel right to me.



The aim is to exert pressure on the various development teams to come to a solution.

But a bomb does not guarantee a good solution, nor that the solution is applied at the time it is needed.



Indeed, some correctly argue that the next subsequent HF can remove the bomb entirely, so why have it in the first place?



Ultimately, for me it boils down to responsibility that we as Bitcoin developers have for the system's health. Implanting a bomb or other mechanism which is detrimental to the functioning of the system goes against my grain as a software developer. It sends a mixed message to users as well. Personally, it would shake my confidence in the system's future, knowing that something like this lurks in the depths, that a clock is ticking and put my ability to USE my money at risk.