On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 11:49:28PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote: > I would not modify my node if the change introduced a perpetual 100 BTC > subsidy per block, even if 99% of miners went along with it.
Surely, in that scenario Bitcoin is dead. If the fork you prefer has only 1% of the hash power it is trivially vulnerably not just to a 51% attack but to a 501% attack, not to mention the fact that you'd only be getting one block every 16 hours. > > A hardfork is safe when 100% of (economically relevant) users upgrade. If > miners don't upgrade at that point, they just lose money. > > This is why a hashrate-triggered hardfork does not make sense. Either you > believe everyone will upgrade anyway, and the hashrate doesn't matter. Or > you are not certain, and the fork is risky, independent of what hashrate > upgrades. Beliefs are all very well, but they can be wrong. Of course we should not go ahead with a fork that we believe to be dangerous, but requiring a supermajority of miners is surely a wise precaution. I fail to see any realistic scenario where 99% of miners vote for the hard fork to go ahead, and the econonomic majority votes to stay on the blockchain whose hashrate has just dropped two orders of magnitude - so low that the mean time between blocks is now over 16 hours. > > And the march 2013 fork showed that miners upgrade at a different schedule > than the rest of the network. > On May 7, 2015 5:44 PM, "Roy Badami" <r...@gnomon.org.uk> wrote: > > > > > > On the other hand, if 99.99% of the miners updated and only 75% of > > > merchants and 75% of users updated, then that would be a serioud split of > > > the network. > > > > But is that a plausible scenario? Certainly *if* the concensus rules > > required a 99% supermajority of miners for the hard fork to go ahead, > > then there would be absoltely no rational reason for merchants and > > users to refuse to upgrade, even if they don't support the changes > > introduces by the hard fork. Their only choice, if the fork succeeds, > > is between the active chain and the one that is effectively stalled - > > and, of course, they can make that choice ahead of time. > > > > roy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud > > Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications > > Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights > > Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. > > http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y > > _______________________________________________ > > Bitcoin-development mailing list > > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
