4 ms·

>That would be a hard fork, because they will not be able to spend those "higher" coinbase outputs, which are seen as lower to the rest of the network. If the

>That would be a hard fork, because they will not be able to spend those "higher" coinbase outputs, which are seen as lower to the rest of the network. If the majority of miners agree to it then the rest of the network either goes along with it, or they're forced to do a hard fork themselves. >An unintentional hard fork, or an intentional one like BCH? For the end user just trying to make a payment, it's irrelevant whether it's intentional or not, either way he is now faced with the spitting of his coins and the resulting chaos. >The bitcoin block reward distribution is not finished yet, so it is too early to say. But I predict that it will be too deflationary This is also a useless distinction for users, either way hyperinflation or hyperdeflation are both catastrophic. >That only works insofar as users (irrationally) trust stablecoins disproportionately compared to bitcoin. Any trust in any cryptocurrency is irrational, there's nothing that actually guarantees any of these coins won't collapse tomorrow. They're all based on ponzi economics. What's the actual value of a bitcoin? There just isn't one.

cowtools 4y ago
>If the majority of miners agree to it then the rest of the network either goes along with it, or they're forced to do a hard fork themselves. The only the hashrate attacks can do is alter the order of transactions (for example allowing them to replace their past transactions and double-spend). They cannot change the way in which users interpret blocks (for example, they cannot spend another user's outputs, change the value of a given output such as a coinbase output, or otherwise alter the tokenomics). I recommend watching 3blue1brown's video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBC-nXj3Ng4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBC-nXj3Ng4 >For the end user just trying to make a payment, it's irrelevant whether it's intentional or not, either way he is now faced with the spitting of his coins and the resulting chaos. Any reasonable vendor will wait for X amount of blocks to pass before accepting a transaction. You're describing a well known vector called a "Finney Attack", which becomes exponentially less likely for every block you wait. >What's the actual value of a bitcoin? There just isn't one. Take the number of pizzas that are being sold for bitcoins, and divide that by the number of bitcoins in circulation. I think you may find that the value of BTC/Pizza has not changed much over the last decade. I mean, what is the actual value of a dollar. It is not like we use the gold standard anymore. The dollar is valuable because it is a connected to a useful payment system. You don't mind holding some liquidity in US Dollars because you have an expectation that you will be able to spend your dollars somewhere in the near future, not because you trade it in for shiny yellow ingots.
saurik 4y ago
> If the majority of miners agree to it then the rest of the network either goes along with it, or they're forced to do a hard fork themselves. No. This isn't even remotely how the technology works. If the majority of the miners right now decide to start doing something different, they have simply excited the ecosystem. The existing network of users and clients will continue to use the remaining set of miners without having to do any active work to switch to them. In the mean time, the majority of miners that decided to go off in the corner and play their own game are going to start seeing defectors back to the "real" network they left behind as they are no longer making money mining as all of the new Bitcoin they are receiving isn't honored by any of the exchanges or stores or users until they convince people to start switching... a process that, for similar reasons of users wanting their transactions to be honored by other users, can't be done piecemeal. The miners simply don't have the power you claim they do.

cowtools 4y ago

>If the majority of miners agree to it then the rest of the network either goes along with it, or they're forced to do a hard fork themselves. The only the hashrate attacks can do is alter the order of transactions (for example allowing them to replace their past transactions and double-spend). They cannot change the way in which users interpret blocks (for example, they cannot spend another user's outputs, change the value of a given output such as a coinbase output, or otherwise alter the tokenomics). I recommend watching 3blue1brown's video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBC-nXj3Ng4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBC-nXj3Ng4 >For the end user just trying to make a payment, it's irrelevant whether it's intentional or not, either way he is now faced with the spitting of his coins and the resulting chaos. Any reasonable vendor will wait for X amount of blocks to pass before accepting a transaction. You're describing a well known vector called a "Finney Attack", which becomes exponentially less likely for every block you wait. >What's the actual value of a bitcoin? There just isn't one. Take the number of pizzas that are being sold for bitcoins, and divide that by the number of bitcoins in circulation. I think you may find that the value of BTC/Pizza has not changed much over the last decade. I mean, what is the actual value of a dollar. It is not like we use the gold standard anymore. The dollar is valuable because it is a connected to a useful payment system. You don't mind holding some liquidity in US Dollars because you have an expectation that you will be able to spend your dollars somewhere in the near future, not because you trade it in for shiny yellow ingots.

saurik 4y ago

> If the majority of miners agree to it then the rest of the network either goes along with it, or they're forced to do a hard fork themselves. No. This isn't even remotely how the technology works. If the majority of the miners right now decide to start doing something different, they have simply excited the ecosystem. The existing network of users and clients will continue to use the remaining set of miners without having to do any active work to switch to them. In the mean time, the majority of miners that decided to go off in the corner and play their own game are going to start seeing defectors back to the "real" network they left behind as they are no longer making money mining as all of the new Bitcoin they are receiving isn't honored by any of the exchanges or stores or users until they convince people to start switching... a process that, for similar reasons of users wanting their transactions to be honored by other users, can't be done piecemeal. The miners simply don't have the power you claim they do.