3 ms·

Old nodes continue to work only in a trivial sense: after a soft-fork, they can no longer properly interpret the meaning of data in the blockchain, so their abi

by pash 11y ago

Old nodes continue to work only in a trivial sense: after a soft-fork, they can no longer properly interpret the meaning of data in the blockchain, so their ability to validate new transactions has been destroyed. If Bitcoin Core's soft fork to introduce segregated witness proceeds, for example, nodes that are not upgraded (and so have no understanding of the witness data) will happily interpret all seg-wit transactions as valid, whether they really are or not. For this reason, some people view soft forks as insidious in a way that hard forks are not: the sole purpose of a Bitcoin node is to interpret data contained in the blockchain and in newly broadcast transactions to determine the validity of those transactions under a particular ruleset, and a soft-fork is a subterfuge specifically designed to make some of those nodes unaware that their ability to perform that function has been destroyed. If soft forks are "less risky", it is precisely for that reason: soft forks ensure that the nodes of miners and users who do not explicitly consent to a rule change fail even to notice that the rules have changed!

ikeboy 11y ago
Firstly, not all soft forks introduce extra data. Some are simply about minor policy. Second, soft forks have been the standard since the beginning, and everyone understands that minors can set their own rules. Third, non upgraded nodes, if they follow the longest chain, do not break. If they mine themselves they'll get orphaned, but that doesn't break them as long as they wait for a couple of blocks before accepting transactions as valid. Fourth, soft forks have traditionally repurposed non standard transactions, which shouldn't be issued by anyone expecting consistent behavior. Segwit uses anyone-can-spend which are non standard, and as the bip says "Wallets should always be wary of anyone-can-spend scripts and treat them with suspicion." Fifth, anyone can "notice" by virtue of the block header changing. A majority of minors can reject transactions, that's not deceitful in any way.

by pash 11y ago

ikeboy 11y ago

Firstly, not all soft forks introduce extra data. Some are simply about minor policy. Second, soft forks have been the standard since the beginning, and everyone understands that minors can set their own rules. Third, non upgraded nodes, if they follow the longest chain, do not break. If they mine themselves they'll get orphaned, but that doesn't break them as long as they wait for a couple of blocks before accepting transactions as valid. Fourth, soft forks have traditionally repurposed non standard transactions, which shouldn't be issued by anyone expecting consistent behavior. Segwit uses anyone-can-spend which are non standard, and as the bip says "Wallets should always be wary of anyone-can-spend scripts and treat them with suspicion." Fifth, anyone can "notice" by virtue of the block header changing. A majority of minors can reject transactions, that's not deceitful in any way.