Scenario 1. No
The economic nodes would be able to spend the funds intended to deposit or withdraw from the drivechains. Miners rejecting the spend txn would eventually lead to miners that would defect and spend themself, or other miners building on top of valid blocks. So maintaining 51% attack by miners means hoping for no defection and forgoing taking the funds themself and transaction fees (the funds are worth more)
Scenario 2. Also no. Same as above, but miners are in a worse position.
Non upgraded nodes would see the TX as anyonecanspend, and while thered be automation to spend, its really a miner that would either not be upgraded, or one that had support but defected who would win.
All softforks carry a chainsplit risk, and the best way to avoid that is to either A) dont fork (status quo, where we are now), or B) ensure social consensus, then proceed with activation with BIP 8, LOT=true where miners can signal their readiness.
Even after activation, I avoid putting funds at risk in new tx types for a time until im confident enough nodes truly are backing the new softfork rules to protect it.
Vic
npub1yx…p7kza
2023-08-17 04:36:26
in reply to nevent1q…f87u
Author Public Key
npub1yx6pjypd4r7qh2gysjhvjd9l2km6hnm4amdnjyjw3467fy05rf0qfp7kzaPublished at
2023-08-17 04:36:26Event JSON
{
"id": "98427c611bc751885a72c904f6bb6510560adfece03adce279f2de6246c5a502",
"pubkey": "21b419102da8fc0ba90484aec934bf55b7abcf75eedb39124e8d75e491f41a5e",
"created_at": 1692246986,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"bab97be31ae39cab24a2ad4da9ac6fa0ca75c976e6ad22e9354ee37d1c2aae59",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"ef89256d16d24e770e48a6088b3def2233e8bae7266d02805074a86cb5333e83"
],
[
"e",
"ec0ea430dbeb47813d3c0b385796becda616ec75522d2734b816d05b18fc270c",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"fdd5e8f6ae0db817be0b71da20498c1806968d8a6459559c249f322fa73464a7"
],
[
"p",
"21b419102da8fc0ba90484aec934bf55b7abcf75eedb39124e8d75e491f41a5e"
],
[
"p",
"21b419102da8fc0ba90484aec934bf55b7abcf75eedb39124e8d75e491f41a5e"
],
[
"p",
"98a386c766ac9250f4ce1b500662fd08e4d464a1915743eedc83bd50521decac"
]
],
"content": "Scenario 1. No\nThe economic nodes would be able to spend the funds intended to deposit or withdraw from the drivechains. Miners rejecting the spend txn would eventually lead to miners that would defect and spend themself, or other miners building on top of valid blocks. So maintaining 51% attack by miners means hoping for no defection and forgoing taking the funds themself and transaction fees (the funds are worth more)\n\nScenario 2. Also no. Same as above, but miners are in a worse position.\n\nNon upgraded nodes would see the TX as anyonecanspend, and while thered be automation to spend, its really a miner that would either not be upgraded, or one that had support but defected who would win.\n\nAll softforks carry a chainsplit risk, and the best way to avoid that is to either A) dont fork (status quo, where we are now), or B) ensure social consensus, then proceed with activation with BIP 8, LOT=true where miners can signal their readiness.\n\nEven after activation, I avoid putting funds at risk in new tx types for a time until im confident enough nodes truly are backing the new softfork rules to protect it. ",
"sig": "70ff539c09a64f4581ef9db318559e6a1b78d66e5e74c3d3a534cb4ab0139dee6a0d3c4d6df0abe78426de6c597d7c5d8426d4f8463fb91232f512c6f71d8784"
}