4 ms·
> otherwise you're effectively mining a very expensive altcoin which no merchants or exchanges accept. This is not the case. You could run XT for example and r
by Rauchg 11y ago
> otherwise you're effectively mining a very expensive altcoin which no merchants or exchanges accept.
This is not the case. You could run XT for example and remain compatible, which was precisely its adoption strategy? It just simply did not reach consensus (aka CPU power).
> By mining with Bitcoin XT you will produce blocks with a new version number. This indicates to the rest of the network that you support larger blocks. When 75% of the blocks are new-version blocks, a decision has been reached to start building larger blocks that will be rejected by Bitcoin Core nodes.
(from https://bitcoinxt.software/ https://bitcoinxt.software/)
- patio11 11y agoThat's BitcoinXT's protocol, sure, but that isn't Bitcoin Core's "protocol", so the powers that be can simply say "We do not accept your attempt to reject our reality and substitute your own."
- Rauchg 11y agoThe powers that be are the CPUs. If XT had reached its goal of 75% mining votes by versioning blocks, today it'd be what you call the "protocol".
- rmc 11y agoBut who calls it the protocol? Let's pretend this fork happens. Someone goes to bitcoin.org and download the software called bitcoin and runs it, and they won't be using that protocol.
- MBCook 11y agoYes but as the article said some(s) started DDOSing or otherwise applying pressure to those who chose XT. That's on top of the fear of a long running fork in the blockchain.