3 ms·

You're right about the dumping; I was thinking more about the case where you controlled the protocol on the machines of a partitioned network (eg., so you relea

You're right about the dumping; I was thinking more about the case where you controlled the protocol on the machines of a partitioned network (eg., so you release a new version of btc which uses exploitable crytography, etc.). In the case of a mere 51% at scale, hijinks are still quite possible from replays, reorderings, etc. I was more preoccupied by the case where the state's acting in its own borders with control over the network, major miners, most machines on the network -- at this point basically no gaurentees remain

rlpb 3y ago
> the case where you controlled the protocol on the machines of a partitioned network (eg., so you release a new version of btc which uses exploitable crytography Such a change would be treated as a "monopoly money" fork by those wanting to transact, and ignored. "No I don't want your fake money; send me real BTC or GTFO". This is why miners cannot arbitrarily change the protocol in their favour even today.