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
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>) id 1YqTfk-0003CL-Rn
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 07 May 2015 21:49:36 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.217.179 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.217.179; envelope-from=pieter.wuille@gmail.com;
helo=mail-lb0-f179.google.com;
Received: from mail-lb0-f179.google.com ([209.85.217.179])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YqTfj-00076K-I4
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 07 May 2015 21:49:36 +0000
Received: by lbbqq2 with SMTP id qq2so40828579lbb.3
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 07 May 2015 14:49:29 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.224.164 with SMTP id rd4mr498278lac.77.1431035369191;
Thu, 07 May 2015 14:49:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.19.7 with HTTP; Thu, 7 May 2015 14:49:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.19.7 with HTTP; Thu, 7 May 2015 14:49:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20150507214200.GJ63100@giles.gnomon.org.uk>
References: <20150507200023.GI63100@giles.gnomon.org.uk>
<CAE-z3OVgX9S0sJqq-iFdkZn_wK-a=Vs4VpNwxpcagDEYFzNSDQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20150507214200.GJ63100@giles.gnomon.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 23:49:28 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBidvTSAKa6exw-XavfDxPWN_6N83VKJpm8dNSBhbXYgUA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Roy Badami <roy@gnomon.org.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11340bf2d77cbd051584e2f3
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(pieter.wuille[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1YqTfj-00076K-I4
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Mechanics of a hard fork
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 21:49:36 -0000
--001a11340bf2d77cbd051584e2f3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
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.
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.
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" <roy@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
>
--001a11340bf2d77cbd051584e2f3
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<p dir=3D"ltr">I would not modify my node if the change introduced a perpet=
ual 100 BTC subsidy per block, even if 99% of miners went along with it.</p=
>
<p dir=3D"ltr">A hardfork is safe when 100% of (economically relevant) user=
s upgrade. If miners don't upgrade at that point, they just lose money.=
</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">This is why a hashrate-triggered hardfork does not make sens=
e. Either you believe everyone will upgrade anyway, and the hashrate doesn&=
#39;t matter. Or you are not certain, and the fork is risky, independent of=
what hashrate upgrades.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">And the march 2013 fork showed that miners upgrade at a diff=
erent schedule than the rest of the network.</p>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On May 7, 2015 5:44 PM, "Roy Badami" &=
lt;<a href=3D"mailto:roy@gnomon.org.uk">roy@gnomon.org.uk</a>> wrote:<br=
type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0=
0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
> On the other hand, if 99.99% of the miners updated and only 75% of<br>
> merchants and 75% of users updated, then that would be a serioud split=
of<br>
> the network.<br>
<br>
But is that a plausible scenario?=A0 Certainly *if* the concensus rules<br>
required a 99% supermajority of miners for the hard fork to go ahead,<br>
then there would be absoltely no rational reason for merchants and<br>
users to refuse to upgrade, even if they don't support the changes<br>
introduces by the hard fork.=A0 Their only choice, if the fork succeeds,<br=
>
is between the active chain and the one that is effectively stalled -<br>
and, of course, they can make that choice ahead of time.<br>
<br>
roy<br>
<br>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---<br>
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud<br=
>
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications<br>
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights<br=
>
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.<br>
<a href=3D"http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y" target=
=3D"_blank">http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Bitcoin-development mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin-develo=
pment@lists.sourceforge.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development=
" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de=
velopment</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
--001a11340bf2d77cbd051584e2f3--
|
