📅 Original date posted:2015-12-21
📝 Original message:On 2015-12-21 11:39, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:21 PM, joe2015--- via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Current hard fork implementations include / will include miner
> lock-in, just like any soft fork. They will not activate if global
> consensus is not reached.
That's not true at all. They activate with a miner majority (e.g. 75%,
95%, etc.), not global consensus. Here global really means global, i.e.
miner, economic, all clients, etc. In the case of a hardfork there is
nothing stopping the miner minority from continuing the old chain. With
a softfork the miner minority is forced to upgrade otherwise their
blocks will be eventually orphaned.
My proposal achieves a hardfork-like blocksize limit increase but, like
a softfork, also forces the miner minority to upgrade.
--joe.
joe2015 at openmailbox.org [ARCHIVE] /
npub1gw…hphxp
2023-06-07 17:47:16
in reply to nevent1q…lnry
Author Public Key
npub1gwmm2y87243ku554j225754cr4ld7zmy5uajdkpmgd9cnvaey7cs4hphxpPublished at
2023-06-07 17:47:16Event JSON
{
"id": "54e9c3713d9363300d7feef7e484b4e5837a82f5aee6e92d2b744f99aa293fa1",
"pubkey": "43b7b510fe55636e529592954f52b81d7edf0b64a73b26d83b434b89b3b927b1",
"created_at": 1686160036,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"cff63604c5ea2135194b6bb6cc24978162ba68b9dba72176ba103744f1094f89",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"b9ba65655bc7d0a00d7229d64e582b3eb8c703ef56cd8dd60f008745a8818eef",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"b25e10e25d470d9b215521b50da0dfe7a209bec7fedeb53860c3e180ffdc8c11"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-12-21\n📝 Original message:On 2015-12-21 11:39, Jeff Garzik wrote:\n\u003e On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:21 PM, joe2015--- via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e Current hard fork implementations include / will include miner\n\u003e lock-in, just like any soft fork. They will not activate if global\n\u003e consensus is not reached.\n\nThat's not true at all. They activate with a miner majority (e.g. 75%, \n95%, etc.), not global consensus. Here global really means global, i.e. \nminer, economic, all clients, etc. In the case of a hardfork there is \nnothing stopping the miner minority from continuing the old chain. With \na softfork the miner minority is forced to upgrade otherwise their \nblocks will be eventually orphaned.\n\nMy proposal achieves a hardfork-like blocksize limit increase but, like \na softfork, also forces the miner minority to upgrade.\n\n--joe.",
"sig": "684bba97c55519f999ac65ec558a40a9814a83096de55c2670ff193198144864117093c0212692ae027236b1ed671196ce0d3ca2a66708966cc4c91a514b5a08"
}