3 ms·
Think of a git repo with all of the miners maintaining the master branch. If suddenly a majority of miners wants to create a new branch and they are over 51% o
by nickthemagicman 10y ago
Think of a git repo with all of the miners maintaining the master branch. If suddenly a majority of miners wants to create a new branch and they are over 51% of the miners, the new branch becomes the master branch.
Both branches still work. All coins before the fork apply to both branches, however, after the fork,both branches are different, any new coins purchased apply to only one branch.
It's essentially two coins at that point. Then essentially it's up to the payment processers like coinbase to decide which one to support.
- differentView 10y agoSo is there a danger that I may have Bitcoins from the wrong branch after the fork? How can I tell?
- programmarchy 10y agoYou'd still have the coins on both branches. However, what is likely to happen is that the value of the coins on one branch will fall to zero once a consensus is reached about which branch to use.
- Kinnard 10y agoThat doesn't explain what the divide is about(How to scale Bitcoin now that it has become so much more popular) and doesn't touch on the fact that as Bitcoin is still achieving internality, and most users don't hold their own Bitcoin the exchanges/wallets and the interface fiat-liquidity they provide matter A LOT and these parties largely support seg-wit which arguably gives them more power.
- 6nf 10y agoSegwit is still compatible with increasing the block size a la Bitcoin Unlimited. They are not being forced to give up segwit here. It's really two separate conversations. Supporting segwit doesn't mean automatically opposing BU.
- Kinnard 10y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14047294 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14047294