5 ms·

It isn't as simple as that. Not only have you got to change that line of code, you need to convince all users of bitcoin to run that version of the code includi

It isn't as simple as that. Not only have you got to change that line of code, you need to convince all users of bitcoin to run that version of the code including miners. Otherwise you have forked the coin and you might be the only user of it (your version is incompatible with the rest).

glitchc 6y ago
You don’t need most to agree. Just the basic majority (50%+). And of course that’s exactly what the major mining consortiums will do: Collude to increase the limit when it’s reached. After all, the rewards are in the mining, not the transaction fee.
- latchkey 6y ago
  The transaction fees are extremely relevant to miners, it is currently the icing on the cake, but will become more relevant over time.
- yunesj 6y ago
  > You don’t need most to agree. Just the basic majority (50%+). And of course that’s exactly what the major mining consortiums will do You don't need anyone else to agree to start mining your own fork / altcoin. However, even if most of the miners change the protocol, it doesn't mean that the users will.
  - glitchc 6y ago
    Sure, but my coin isn’t worth $20,000. Or even $2.
- gruez 6y ago
  The miners aren't the only ones enforcing the limit, so is every other bitcoin node out there. Just because you have 51% of the mining capacity doesn't mean everyone else (merchants, users, exchanges)[1] will agree. If they decide to unilaterally change the block reward all that would do is cause them to mine worthless blocks. [1] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Economic_majority https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Economic_majority
  - corty 6y ago
    No, miners are far more powerful than all the other stakeholders. While acceptance by merchants is a relevant factor, miners also have to facilitate any transaction. Any fork without miners is instantly unable to transact, making the coins useless and therefore worthless.
    - rafaelero 6y ago
      This is not true. Bitcoin can proceed with half its miners or with 3/4 its miners with no consequence aside a decrease in its resilience to attacks.
    - gruez 6y ago
      >Any fork without miners is instantly unable to transact, making the coins useless and therefore worthless. The incentive structure discourages this. If half the hash power goes off to mine Bitcoin Infinite (the fork with uncapped Bitcoin generation), then mining the original Bitcoin would be twice as lucrative because there's half the competition. This gets better the more miners leave. If 95% of miners leave for Bitcoin Infinite, then mining Bitcoin becomes 20x more lucrative. There's the matter of the difficulty adjustment, but that has been historically dealt with using emergency difficulty adjustments. Meanwhile, the miners who are mining the fork have real expenses (electricity, equipment), which need to be paid, and if there isn't sufficient demand for their Bitcoin Infinite coins, they'll quickly go bankrupt. Some napkin math: * If the hash and economic power are both split 50-50, then there will be little impact in profitability, but also little impact on Bitcoin * If 90% of the mining power goes to Bitcoin Infinite and only 25% of the economic power follows them, then the miners can expect to see a 72% drop in revenue. If their original profit margins were 20%, they can expect their profit margins to drop to -66%. If we use the price/generation rate of just prior to the last halving (May 2020), then that would represent a loss of $9.9M per day (not including opportunity costs/lost profits).
      - glitchc 6y ago
        The incentive structure falls apart once Bitcoin original runs out of blocks to mine. That’s the starting point for this discussion. The only incentive to mine then is to earn the transaction fee. These fees ($8) are currently orders of magnitude smaller than the mining reward of 6.25 coins ($125,000 at $20,000/coin). Either fees have to dramatically compensate by rising stratospherically or miners will depart for greener pastures. Yes, difficulty level drops eventually, but by then a large number of users have also followed miners off the network, in which case the price will drop too. As the price collapses, there will be a selling frenzy, further reducing the price. In this scenario, Bitcoin may settle to something as low as $10 per token. Once miners depart en masse, network resilience will drop precipitously. That makes it an attractive target for someone to stage a coordinated attack, which would destroy remaining residual trust in the network and bringing about the end of Bitcoin original.
- everfree 6y ago
  > You don’t need most to agree. Just the basic majority (50%+). This is a common misconception about how consensus works. Everyone on the network has to agree, anyone who doesn't agree by definition won't be on the same network. They won't be able to receive the same fork of bitcoin that everyone else is sending.
  - glitchc 6y ago
    On the contrary: Consensus is defined precisely at 50%+, not 100% as you imply. In Bitcoin, the longest chain wins, therefore any chain with 50%+ support of the total mining power will inevitably end up with the longest chain. Forks are occurring all the time at the apex of the chain. They wither and die slowly as 50%+ miners accept successive blocks as the next block. That’s why most exchanges and users wait for six blocks on average to deem the transaction settled.

glitchc 6y ago

You don’t need most to agree. Just the basic majority (50%+). And of course that’s exactly what the major mining consortiums will do: Collude to increase the limit when it’s reached. After all, the rewards are in the mining, not the transaction fee.

latchkey 6y ago
The transaction fees are extremely relevant to miners, it is currently the icing on the cake, but will become more relevant over time.
yunesj 6y ago
> You don’t need most to agree. Just the basic majority (50%+). And of course that’s exactly what the major mining consortiums will do You don't need anyone else to agree to start mining your own fork / altcoin. However, even if most of the miners change the protocol, it doesn't mean that the users will.
- glitchc 6y ago
  Sure, but my coin isn’t worth $20,000. Or even $2.
gruez 6y ago
The miners aren't the only ones enforcing the limit, so is every other bitcoin node out there. Just because you have 51% of the mining capacity doesn't mean everyone else (merchants, users, exchanges)[1] will agree. If they decide to unilaterally change the block reward all that would do is cause them to mine worthless blocks. [1] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Economic_majority https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Economic_majority
- corty 6y ago
  No, miners are far more powerful than all the other stakeholders. While acceptance by merchants is a relevant factor, miners also have to facilitate any transaction. Any fork without miners is instantly unable to transact, making the coins useless and therefore worthless.
  - rafaelero 6y ago
    This is not true. Bitcoin can proceed with half its miners or with 3/4 its miners with no consequence aside a decrease in its resilience to attacks.
  - gruez 6y ago
    >Any fork without miners is instantly unable to transact, making the coins useless and therefore worthless. The incentive structure discourages this. If half the hash power goes off to mine Bitcoin Infinite (the fork with uncapped Bitcoin generation), then mining the original Bitcoin would be twice as lucrative because there's half the competition. This gets better the more miners leave. If 95% of miners leave for Bitcoin Infinite, then mining Bitcoin becomes 20x more lucrative. There's the matter of the difficulty adjustment, but that has been historically dealt with using emergency difficulty adjustments. Meanwhile, the miners who are mining the fork have real expenses (electricity, equipment), which need to be paid, and if there isn't sufficient demand for their Bitcoin Infinite coins, they'll quickly go bankrupt. Some napkin math: * If the hash and economic power are both split 50-50, then there will be little impact in profitability, but also little impact on Bitcoin * If 90% of the mining power goes to Bitcoin Infinite and only 25% of the economic power follows them, then the miners can expect to see a 72% drop in revenue. If their original profit margins were 20%, they can expect their profit margins to drop to -66%. If we use the price/generation rate of just prior to the last halving (May 2020), then that would represent a loss of $9.9M per day (not including opportunity costs/lost profits).
    - glitchc 6y ago
      The incentive structure falls apart once Bitcoin original runs out of blocks to mine. That’s the starting point for this discussion. The only incentive to mine then is to earn the transaction fee. These fees ($8) are currently orders of magnitude smaller than the mining reward of 6.25 coins ($125,000 at $20,000/coin). Either fees have to dramatically compensate by rising stratospherically or miners will depart for greener pastures. Yes, difficulty level drops eventually, but by then a large number of users have also followed miners off the network, in which case the price will drop too. As the price collapses, there will be a selling frenzy, further reducing the price. In this scenario, Bitcoin may settle to something as low as $10 per token. Once miners depart en masse, network resilience will drop precipitously. That makes it an attractive target for someone to stage a coordinated attack, which would destroy remaining residual trust in the network and bringing about the end of Bitcoin original.
everfree 6y ago
> You don’t need most to agree. Just the basic majority (50%+). This is a common misconception about how consensus works. Everyone on the network has to agree, anyone who doesn't agree by definition won't be on the same network. They won't be able to receive the same fork of bitcoin that everyone else is sending.
- glitchc 6y ago
  On the contrary: Consensus is defined precisely at 50%+, not 100% as you imply. In Bitcoin, the longest chain wins, therefore any chain with 50%+ support of the total mining power will inevitably end up with the longest chain. Forks are occurring all the time at the apex of the chain. They wither and die slowly as 50%+ miners accept successive blocks as the next block. That’s why most exchanges and users wait for six blocks on average to deem the transaction settled.