3 ms·

> It's irrational to go with the chain that has less power, because the entities that created the chain with more power can easily overwrite the chain with less

by lottin 5y ago

> It's irrational to go with the chain that has less power, because the entities that created the chain with more power can easily overwrite the chain with less power by virtue of having more power. This basically means the entire bitcoin network depends on the entities that have the most computer power behaving correctly, am I wrong?

Arnavion 5y ago
That is correct. As I wrote in [1], the situation where the majority power becomes irrational is a doomsday scenario for bitcoin. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28020592 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28020592
- lottin 5y ago
  Right. Though the problem is not so much behaving irrationally as dishonestly. At any rate it's hard to argue that the bitcoin network is more "trustless" than a bank, since we have coercive mechanisms to ensure that a bank will behave honestly, while we don't have the same mechanisms to ensure bitcoin miners will do the same. Bitcoin users have to trust that they will be honest.
  - Arnavion 5y ago
    No, you still don't understand. It's not dishonesty, it's irrationality. First you assume that the majority computation power is already colluding. This is not the case. Let's assume it's the case. As soon as they stop adding all transactions to a block that they would've been expected to, the entire world will notice. In response, the currency will become valueless. That is, it's a public act to abuse your position as a majority power, and the very act of your abuse destroys the thing that you're trying to abuse to your profit.
    - lottin 5y ago
      No, it's you who don't understand. There are many ways someone can profit from bitcoin losing all its value. And there many motivations other than financial profit. Therefore it's more accurate to speak of dishonesty rather that irrationality.
      - warkdarrior 5y ago
        This is key. Profits from Bitcoin or from Bitcoin's losses are not restricted to the Bitcoin ecosystem. In other words, the Bitcoin ecosystem is not closed. For example, Ethereum or Algorand or Avalanche may benefit if bitcoin loses its value, even if those communities may not participate in Bitcoin.
- FabHK 5y ago
  Suppose the majority decides that they won't halve coinbase (the mining reward) after every 210,000 blocks anymore (thus removing the 21m cap). Maybe that's irrational, maybe that's rational. Who is to say?

by lottin 5y ago

Arnavion 5y ago

That is correct. As I wrote in [1], the situation where the majority power becomes irrational is a doomsday scenario for bitcoin. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28020592 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28020592

lottin 5y ago
Right. Though the problem is not so much behaving irrationally as dishonestly. At any rate it's hard to argue that the bitcoin network is more "trustless" than a bank, since we have coercive mechanisms to ensure that a bank will behave honestly, while we don't have the same mechanisms to ensure bitcoin miners will do the same. Bitcoin users have to trust that they will be honest.
- Arnavion 5y ago
  No, you still don't understand. It's not dishonesty, it's irrationality. First you assume that the majority computation power is already colluding. This is not the case. Let's assume it's the case. As soon as they stop adding all transactions to a block that they would've been expected to, the entire world will notice. In response, the currency will become valueless. That is, it's a public act to abuse your position as a majority power, and the very act of your abuse destroys the thing that you're trying to abuse to your profit.
  - lottin 5y ago
    No, it's you who don't understand. There are many ways someone can profit from bitcoin losing all its value. And there many motivations other than financial profit. Therefore it's more accurate to speak of dishonesty rather that irrationality.
    - warkdarrior 5y ago
      This is key. Profits from Bitcoin or from Bitcoin's losses are not restricted to the Bitcoin ecosystem. In other words, the Bitcoin ecosystem is not closed. For example, Ethereum or Algorand or Avalanche may benefit if bitcoin loses its value, even if those communities may not participate in Bitcoin.
FabHK 5y ago
Suppose the majority decides that they won't halve coinbase (the mining reward) after every 210,000 blocks anymore (thus removing the 21m cap). Maybe that's irrational, maybe that's rational. Who is to say?