3 ms·
Very interesting thought. I believe that chains would initially split, effectively being forks of each other. However, the consensus algorithm of Bitcoin dictat
by nooneiswatching 6y ago
Very interesting thought. I believe that chains would initially split, effectively being forks of each other. However, the consensus algorithm of Bitcoin dictates that the chain with the most work is the valid one, meaning that in the event of a "reconnection", one of the chains would be abandoned (and everyone would agree which one to keep, namely the one with the most work).
In the case of a total disconnect between countries, there is no other way than splitting the network. If partial connectivity exists (using satellites for example), transactions could still be broadcasted from one country to another. However, the same coins could be double-spent in your own isolated network as well... until a reorg happens upon reconnect.
- Hydraulix989 6y agoPhilosophical question: At what point do divergent chains become irreconcilably and separately valid? Is this a property we would ever want in a should-be decentralized currency? One way this can happen today is with intentional forks.
- Jimmc414 6y agoThat is actually a good and very practical question.
- Hydraulix989 6y agoI think it reduces to the chains will always have to be reconciled because you would otherwise open yourself up to N% attacks where N is whatever threshold you decided was "safe.'
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]