π
Original date posted:2015-08-16
π Original message:Cam, your scenario makes no sense.
> 1. Spoil the ballot. Have Bitcoin Core propagate the Bitcoin XT version
string.
> 2. Encourage all miners to false vote for the Bitcoin XT fork.
This would obliterate any confidence in Bitcoin Core. I seriously doubt
anyone would actually be ok with a pull request implementing this.
> 3. Setup good Atomic Swap markets.
Who would bother writing this code, let alone trading on these markets?
> 4. Setup a fork of Bitcoin XT that allows people to easily make a
transaction only on the XT fork (while leaving the original BTC coins
untouched).
I doubt this is even possible.
On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 6:02 PM Cameron Garnham via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> I think that it is important to note that Bitcoin XT faces a natural
> uphill battle.
>
> Since it is possible to setup atomic inter-fork coin trades. I do not
> see how Bitcoin XT could possibly win if Satoshi decides to sell 10000
> XTBTC for BTC everyday for the first 100 days after the fork.
>
> In many ways Satoshi gets to decide the winning fork just by his huge
> economic investment in Bitcoin.
>
>
> Here is some simple game-theory for non-consensus forks:
>
> 1. Spoil the ballot. Have Bitcoin Core propagate the Bitcoin XT version
> string.
>
> 2. Encourage all miners to false vote for the Bitcoin XT fork.
>
> - Now people have no-idea what % of the economy Bitcoin XT holds. -
> Making it impossible for people to put economic faith behind Bitcoin XT.
>
> 3. Setup good Atomic Swap markets.
>
> 4. Setup a fork of Bitcoin XT that allows people to easily make a
> transaction only on the XT fork (while leaving the original BTC coins
> untouched).
>
>
> This means that the Bitcoin XT fork will be born per-mature. Probably
> with only a small % of hashing power behind it (contrary to the almost
> 100% that falsely claim to support it). It will be embarrassing that for
> the goal of larger blocks, XT instead has blocks (before re-adjustment)
> every 2h.
>
>
> The price for XTBTC coins will plummet, Satoshi progressively dumping
> his 1M stash over a year or so will make sure that it doesn't recover
> either.
>
>
> I cannot see how Bitcoin XT is but-not in a extremely weak position from
> game theory.
>
> I'm sure smarter people than I could come up with even more ways to
> disrupt non-consensus forks.
>
> Cam.
>
>
>
> On 16/8/2015 6:39 AM, muyuubyou via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > I posted this to /r/BitcoinMarkets but I thought I might post it here as
> > well.
> >
> > ---
> > Currently 0 mined blocks have voted for XT.
> >
> > If it ever gets close to even 50%, many things can happen that would
> > reshape the game completely.
> >
> > For instance:
> >
> > - Core could start boycotting XT by not relying to them and/or not
> relying
> > from them.
> >
> > - Core could appropriate the version string of XT, making it impossible
> to
> > know how much they are progressing and a losing bet to actually execute
> the
> > fork.
> >
> > This kind of node war if the factions were sizeable would make it very
> > risky to transact at all - balances in new addresses could end up
> > vanishing. Usability of the system would plummet.
> >
> > Note that any disagreement between the network and the biggest economic
> > actors - mainly the exchanges at this point, "wallet services" maybe -
> > would mean BTC plummets. Hard. And so would confidence.
> >
> > It's a risky game to play.
> > ---
> >
> > PS: I consider this attempt at takeover about as foul as it gets. The
> > equivalent of repeating a referendum until a yes is obtained: the
> > reasonable reaction to this is actively blocking said "referendum". There
> > was a fair play alternative which is voting through coinbase scriptSig
> like
> > plain 8MBers are doing, or like BIP 100 proposes for dynamic adjustment.
> > Once a majority is obtained in this way, devs have to react or if they
> > don't then this sort of foul play would be justified. But this wasn't the
> > case.
> >
> > -----
> > ηΊγγ°ζγ
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
> > bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150816/85c8ae7b/attachment-0001.html>;
Andrew LeCody [ARCHIVE] /
npub10qβ¦rt9pg
2023-06-07 17:35:28
in reply to nevent1qβ¦np3x
Author Public Key
npub10qzuhfx33295fwj8eq86vlfc9e5mkzj5lzzpcwhj2yqyae3jetysxrt9pgPublished at
2023-06-07 17:35:28Event JSON
{
"id": "7c6e2eb45c5caddc8049db4e51f1193773dd489ca3b361d003e52e88cbbf143e",
"pubkey": "7805cba4d18a8b44ba47c80fa67d382e69bb0a54f8841c3af251004ee632cac9",
"created_at": 1686159328,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"c8deaa0aeee1e5d915e04ef7baf8b8074172a310b656820cd8767442ca514e56",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"44fd409ca9b7d4404b2fd68338b1a4e4e12943e5bba08699f22f0ed20c1bb52e",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"05ff1a1da79f4ed8e7928f7b6cf225a88de06820c57a7e5425d2ac5dac6068d9"
]
],
"content": "π
Original date posted:2015-08-16\nπ Original message:Cam, your scenario makes no sense.\n\n\u003e 1. Spoil the ballot. Have Bitcoin Core propagate the Bitcoin XT version\nstring.\n\u003e 2. Encourage all miners to false vote for the Bitcoin XT fork.\n\nThis would obliterate any confidence in Bitcoin Core. I seriously doubt\nanyone would actually be ok with a pull request implementing this.\n\n\u003e 3. Setup good Atomic Swap markets.\n\nWho would bother writing this code, let alone trading on these markets?\n\n\u003e 4. Setup a fork of Bitcoin XT that allows people to easily make a\ntransaction only on the XT fork (while leaving the original BTC coins\nuntouched).\n\nI doubt this is even possible.\n\nOn Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 6:02 PM Cameron Garnham via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e I think that it is important to note that Bitcoin XT faces a natural\n\u003e uphill battle.\n\u003e\n\u003e Since it is possible to setup atomic inter-fork coin trades. I do not\n\u003e see how Bitcoin XT could possibly win if Satoshi decides to sell 10000\n\u003e XTBTC for BTC everyday for the first 100 days after the fork.\n\u003e\n\u003e In many ways Satoshi gets to decide the winning fork just by his huge\n\u003e economic investment in Bitcoin.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Here is some simple game-theory for non-consensus forks:\n\u003e\n\u003e 1. Spoil the ballot. Have Bitcoin Core propagate the Bitcoin XT version\n\u003e string.\n\u003e\n\u003e 2. Encourage all miners to false vote for the Bitcoin XT fork.\n\u003e\n\u003e - Now people have no-idea what % of the economy Bitcoin XT holds. -\n\u003e Making it impossible for people to put economic faith behind Bitcoin XT.\n\u003e\n\u003e 3. Setup good Atomic Swap markets.\n\u003e\n\u003e 4. Setup a fork of Bitcoin XT that allows people to easily make a\n\u003e transaction only on the XT fork (while leaving the original BTC coins\n\u003e untouched).\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e This means that the Bitcoin XT fork will be born per-mature. Probably\n\u003e with only a small % of hashing power behind it (contrary to the almost\n\u003e 100% that falsely claim to support it). It will be embarrassing that for\n\u003e the goal of larger blocks, XT instead has blocks (before re-adjustment)\n\u003e every 2h.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e The price for XTBTC coins will plummet, Satoshi progressively dumping\n\u003e his 1M stash over a year or so will make sure that it doesn't recover\n\u003e either.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e I cannot see how Bitcoin XT is but-not in a extremely weak position from\n\u003e game theory.\n\u003e\n\u003e I'm sure smarter people than I could come up with even more ways to\n\u003e disrupt non-consensus forks.\n\u003e\n\u003e Cam.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e On 16/8/2015 6:39 AM, muyuubyou via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e \u003e I posted this to /r/BitcoinMarkets but I thought I might post it here as\n\u003e \u003e well.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e ---\n\u003e \u003e Currently 0 mined blocks have voted for XT.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e If it ever gets close to even 50%, many things can happen that would\n\u003e \u003e reshape the game completely.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e For instance:\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e - Core could start boycotting XT by not relying to them and/or not\n\u003e relying\n\u003e \u003e from them.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e - Core could appropriate the version string of XT, making it impossible\n\u003e to\n\u003e \u003e know how much they are progressing and a losing bet to actually execute\n\u003e the\n\u003e \u003e fork.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e This kind of node war if the factions were sizeable would make it very\n\u003e \u003e risky to transact at all - balances in new addresses could end up\n\u003e \u003e vanishing. Usability of the system would plummet.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Note that any disagreement between the network and the biggest economic\n\u003e \u003e actors - mainly the exchanges at this point, \"wallet services\" maybe -\n\u003e \u003e would mean BTC plummets. Hard. And so would confidence.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e It's a risky game to play.\n\u003e \u003e ---\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e PS: I consider this attempt at takeover about as foul as it gets. The\n\u003e \u003e equivalent of repeating a referendum until a yes is obtained: the\n\u003e \u003e reasonable reaction to this is actively blocking said \"referendum\". There\n\u003e \u003e was a fair play alternative which is voting through coinbase scriptSig\n\u003e like\n\u003e \u003e plain 8MBers are doing, or like BIP 100 proposes for dynamic adjustment.\n\u003e \u003e Once a majority is obtained in this way, devs have to react or if they\n\u003e \u003e don't then this sort of foul play would be justified. But this wasn't the\n\u003e \u003e case.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e -----\n\u003e \u003e ηΊγγ°ζγ\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e \u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e \u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e \u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150816/85c8ae7b/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "41c42503e62da5b3e1b83c2f1476cd4b8a9b2581f4b3978bc09d8d5b237bd6a74639d0ef4e516181f0c0e9ba6a6801d6807d445f52a1a79e8c051a2fd85c09fd"
}