3 ms·
Why would there be no 'people noticing or caring' about a change? Everything I see, from Canaries to codesigning, to simple git mirrors make it easy to detect
by berkes 6y ago
Why would there be no 'people noticing or caring' about a change?
Everything I see, from Canaries to codesigning, to simple git mirrors make it easy to detect such fraud.
Also, there are many unofficial Bitcoin implementations. And with 'core' being the only 'spec', I know from personal experience that a lot of devs of those alternative implementations, make a lot of 'eyeballs'.
- wslh 6y ago> Why would there be no 'people noticing or caring' about a change? Because you cannot assume that node runners and miners are spending time in reviewing commits or entering in discussions except when there are issues that are highlighted and amplified by media such as SegWit2x.
- saurik 6y agoThere is just no such thing as software that can't change; I realize this might mean decentralized systems are simply impossible, but "it is what it is"? I do feel you just don't understand this still, though: if the miners all upgrade and you don't it isn't like they can force anything down your throats as you didn't upgrade. I feel like your mental model is somehow "if 51% of everyone does something invalid then the system is now invalid", but what that actually means is that those people are rejected from your consensus. So, if all the miners decide to run a different software this is effectively just a different distributed system. Your computer, which is checking everything, rejects all of them and keeps playing with the people who are playing the same game. You aren't trusting anyone or assuming anything: that wouldn't be decentralized at all really. Now, is any of this efficient? No. But that wasn't a goal ;P.