đź“… Original date posted:2013-02-13
đź“ť Original message:On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> You misunderstand what BIP_0034 is doing— it's not gauging consensus,
> it's making sure that the change is safe to enforce. This is a subtle
> but important difference.
Sounds reasonable.
The change in BIP-34 doesn't cause old client to reject the main chain.
The increase to the maximum block size would be rejected by old
clients, so is different.
Adding new opcodes (as long as they act like a NOP on success) also
doesn't cause a disagreement about what is the longest chain, in the
end. Miners might end up mining chains which are guaranteed to be
orphaned at worst.
> Bitcoin is not a democracy— it quite intentionally uses the consensus
> mechanism _only_ the one thing that nodes can not autonomously and
> interdependently validate (the ordering of transactions).
So, how is max block size to be decided then?
Raph Frank [ARCHIVE] /
npub1sk…srnm4
2023-06-07 11:32:12
in reply to nevent1q…zr58
Author Public Key
npub1sk6wjnyns3ak73pdka8q2rau686p0kyr9cnqs7gc2egfwasec58qtsrnm4Published at
2023-06-07 11:32:12Event JSON
{
"id": "3dc0e6b2f9d2d209adab7882d73eef57031c6bbbb22d33a91af7107242f9f3bd",
"pubkey": "85b4e94c93847b6f442db74e050fbcd1f417d8832e260879185650977619c50e",
"created_at": 1686137532,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"2e561ad47e92fd0bdf1706fe9a8ca4496d0e4a334280ca5b47233a968945935f",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"8db11834747cf27519cf0f65dc3a6be1867977ed86d087279e705e2f7c8f9398",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"4aa6cf9aa5c8e98f401dac603c6a10207509b6a07317676e9d6615f3d7103d73"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2013-02-13\n📝 Original message:On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Gregory Maxwell \u003cgmaxwell at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e You misunderstand what BIP_0034 is doing— it's not gauging consensus,\n\u003e it's making sure that the change is safe to enforce. This is a subtle\n\u003e but important difference.\n\nSounds reasonable.\n\nThe change in BIP-34 doesn't cause old client to reject the main chain.\n\nThe increase to the maximum block size would be rejected by old\nclients, so is different.\n\nAdding new opcodes (as long as they act like a NOP on success) also\ndoesn't cause a disagreement about what is the longest chain, in the\nend. Miners might end up mining chains which are guaranteed to be\norphaned at worst.\n\n\u003e Bitcoin is not a democracy— it quite intentionally uses the consensus\n\u003e mechanism _only_ the one thing that nodes can not autonomously and\n\u003e interdependently validate (the ordering of transactions).\n\nSo, how is max block size to be decided then?",
"sig": "6967dbc6dfcacc0aac263c40683f7b819c728f3573b0d10b7eafd3949f4b4e7f2a4f6f9c2e0d6e1be4a9fa781a3c990adfbe541cad6e6359eadb45315d84cc6a"
}