4 ms·

Ooh, he was doing so well but his explanation for why users use the main chain instead of a forked chain betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the blockchai

Ooh, he was doing so well but his explanation for why users use the main chain instead of a forked chain betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the blockchain. There is no "blue chain" or "red chain", there are just blocks that point to other blocks. Branches happen all the time, and sometimes those branches become the main chain. So actually, if the red chain was grown faster than the blue chain, it would become "the main chain". But then the miner's transaction in the blue chain would be ignored! The main chain is chain with the greatest computational value, it's the chain that takes the greatest amount of CPU power to compromise (and therefore it's the most trustable). It has nothing to do with Schelling point or bounded rationality, because that suggests you can tell that a block is a "forked block" the moment it's created, but you can't.

kanzure 9y ago
> because that suggests you can tell that a block is a "forked block" the moment it's created, but you can't. Invalid blocks are invalid, that's one way to tell. Run the bitcoin protocol rules and you'll get the same results as everyone else.
- PretzelPirate 9y ago
  You often get two valid blocks at the same time, and whichever one gets the most blocks built on top of it wins.
- phailhaus 9y ago
  True, but I'm referring to valid blocks.
- DSMan195276 9y ago
  He's not talking about a hard fork, where blocks from the new fork are invalid on the old fork. He's just talking about two miners finding a new block at approximately the same time. They're both valid, but only one can become part of the 'main' chain, the other will eventually be lost as nobody continues to mine on top of it.
zby 9y ago
"It has nothing to do with Schelling point or bounded rationality, because that suggests you can tell that a block is a "forked block" the moment it's created, but you can't." - if you mine an invalid block you can tell that it will not be part of the main chain. In this sense mining a valid block is a Schelling point - because it is what you expect others expect.
- eof 9y ago
  yes but if you mine a valid block around the same time someone else mines a random block you can't know until another block is mined (and even then, you might not know)
  - zby 9y ago
    'yes but'? What you are saying is true - but it does not contradict my point in any way. The choice is between making an valid or invalid block - and the Schelling point is making a valid block. Another case is if you see a fork with a shorter and longer branch - then adding to the longer branch is also a Schelling point.
    - phailhaus 9y ago
      Not really...you're not avoiding the invalid block because it's "familiar" to use valid blocks. You're avoiding the invalid block because anything built on it is also invalid so all of those transactions are ignored.
      - zby 9y ago
        Those transactions are ignored because nobody will attach to that branch - and they don't attach to it because it is a Schelling point to attach to a valid branch.
    - phailhaus 9y ago
      It's not a Schelling point to attach to a valid branch if the software itself rejects invalid blocks.

kanzure 9y ago

> because that suggests you can tell that a block is a "forked block" the moment it's created, but you can't. Invalid blocks are invalid, that's one way to tell. Run the bitcoin protocol rules and you'll get the same results as everyone else.

PretzelPirate 9y ago
You often get two valid blocks at the same time, and whichever one gets the most blocks built on top of it wins.
phailhaus 9y ago
True, but I'm referring to valid blocks.
DSMan195276 9y ago
He's not talking about a hard fork, where blocks from the new fork are invalid on the old fork. He's just talking about two miners finding a new block at approximately the same time. They're both valid, but only one can become part of the 'main' chain, the other will eventually be lost as nobody continues to mine on top of it.

zby 9y ago

"It has nothing to do with Schelling point or bounded rationality, because that suggests you can tell that a block is a "forked block" the moment it's created, but you can't." - if you mine an invalid block you can tell that it will not be part of the main chain. In this sense mining a valid block is a Schelling point - because it is what you expect others expect.

eof 9y ago
yes but if you mine a valid block around the same time someone else mines a random block you can't know until another block is mined (and even then, you might not know)
- zby 9y ago
  'yes but'? What you are saying is true - but it does not contradict my point in any way. The choice is between making an valid or invalid block - and the Schelling point is making a valid block. Another case is if you see a fork with a shorter and longer branch - then adding to the longer branch is also a Schelling point.
  - phailhaus 9y ago
    Not really...you're not avoiding the invalid block because it's "familiar" to use valid blocks. You're avoiding the invalid block because anything built on it is also invalid so all of those transactions are ignored.
    - zby 9y ago
      Those transactions are ignored because nobody will attach to that branch - and they don't attach to it because it is a Schelling point to attach to a valid branch.
  - phailhaus 9y ago
    It's not a Schelling point to attach to a valid branch if the software itself rejects invalid blocks.