📅 Original date posted:2021-02-26
📝 Original message:Huh.
I like the mechanism.
I like the honesty that once a feature with high demand and safety is
ready, activation pressure will keep increasing.
The gradual march of time in this Decreasing Threshold proposal is
predictable and incremental in ways that help avoid brinkmanship.
Avoiding the hard fork dynamic (that LOT=true requires) prevents some
chain splits, but activation under political opposition may then still
depend on a UASF. If I thought the time had come to line up a UASF
for a feature, I'd first want to have nodes out there running this
softer Decreasing Threshold activation (maybe before it fails).
It's also not as unresponsive to miner wisdom as LOT=true.
Conceptually, it asks miners to arbitrate both version adoption as
well as whether nodes which haven't upgraded face risks in an early
activation. Should miners find themselves in dramatic unanimity, they
even have enough influence to technically fail any activation.
Ryan Grant [ARCHIVE] /
npub19a…6mwcl
2023-06-07 18:29:11
in reply to nevent1q…smsh
Author Public Key
npub19a2m7qm80t7mzhgqfgunswhm5c3q4fkqt89057ugy7u8jdxncf2q06mwclPublished at
2023-06-07 18:29:11Event JSON
{
"id": "3a9c67404eaefdd408291e2c14de1ad776a03ec96bd23af1d74de452a08442f5",
"pubkey": "2f55bf03677afdb15d004a39383afba6220aa6c059cafa7b8827b87934d3c254",
"created_at": 1686162551,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ef118f7617f86b0c4ac4c01257a2e05c0ff80adfdb8ecb6b2fc7fc2666df4be7",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"99a71faec96b24f5ff3deba9aeec1a87106c16a86467694b035117167c7ef5d3",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a10fbe22e99c203f0bda8ffcadf4e164d61ced01d0849839506e550e8862013a"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2021-02-26\n📝 Original message:Huh.\nI like the mechanism.\n\nI like the honesty that once a feature with high demand and safety is\nready, activation pressure will keep increasing.\n\nThe gradual march of time in this Decreasing Threshold proposal is\npredictable and incremental in ways that help avoid brinkmanship.\n\nAvoiding the hard fork dynamic (that LOT=true requires) prevents some\nchain splits, but activation under political opposition may then still\ndepend on a UASF. If I thought the time had come to line up a UASF\nfor a feature, I'd first want to have nodes out there running this\nsofter Decreasing Threshold activation (maybe before it fails).\n\nIt's also not as unresponsive to miner wisdom as LOT=true.\nConceptually, it asks miners to arbitrate both version adoption as\nwell as whether nodes which haven't upgraded face risks in an early\nactivation. Should miners find themselves in dramatic unanimity, they\neven have enough influence to technically fail any activation.",
"sig": "2ed7127cf58c7286a310ec287dd6722838e7992d289e9842bfd73dedd10c04326a2dbda227eef60365a413dcfbcfbedb9f5d838bfa19565e21cf55056a45e585"
}