1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
|
Return-Path: <tomz@freedommail.ch>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1F407D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 12 May 2016 07:29:18 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mx-out03.mykolab.com (mx01.mykolab.com [95.128.36.1])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33ACDE4
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 12 May 2016 07:29:18 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kolabnow.com
X-Spam-Score: -2.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
Received: from mx03.mykolab.com (mx03.mykolab.com [10.20.7.101])
by mx-out03.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41B5820202;
Thu, 12 May 2016 09:29:15 +0200 (CEST)
From: Tom <tomz@freedommail.ch>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph.org>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 08:29:13 +0100
Message-ID: <5366682.qrCZ1Gi3bP@garp>
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgR3Tyk+RkNQS0Y2kpRp5bzaQJURQq4br9sQCuGoRQ7Ydg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160510185728.GA1149@fedora-21-dvm>
<CAH6h1LuemHi1Z8REhZRywghaLjAzy1e1LeHxVdA7iBifGnLnJA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgR3Tyk+RkNQS0Y2kpRp5bzaQJURQq4br9sQCuGoRQ7Ydg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 12 May 2016 09:50:34 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Making AsicBoost irrelevant
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 07:29:19 -0000
On Wednesday 11 May 2016 22:58:48 Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Timo Hanke via bitcoin-dev
>
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > This is what I meant. If existing hardware gets forked-out it will
> > inevitably lead to the creation of an altcoin. Simply because the hardware
> > exists and can't be used for anything else both chains will survive. I was
> > only comparing the situation to a contentious hardfork that does not fork
> > out any hardware. If the latter one is suspected to lead to the permanent
> > existence of two chains then a hardfork that forks out hardware is even
> > more likely to do so (I claim it's guaranteed).
>
> There are already many altcoins out there, we could not prevent that
> even if we wanted to. New ones are created all the time.
Comparing apples and oranges.
Altcoins have their own genesis block, the example Timo was talking about was
a fork in the Bitcoin blockchain.
But its good to know you don't mind a fork in the Bitcoin chain, I'll remember
that.
|
