📅 Original date posted:2015-09-30
📝 Original message:On Sep 30, 2015 9:56 PM, "Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Jorge has said soft forks always lead to network convergence. No, they
don't. You get constant mini divergences until everyone has upgraded, as
opposed to a single divergence with a hard fork (until everyone has
upgraded). The quantity of invalid blocks mined, on the other hand, is
identical in both types.
Exactly, all those "mini divergences" eventually disappear (because we're
assuming the hashrate majority has upgraded and non-upgraded miners accept
upgraded blocks as valid), even if the hashrate minority never upgrades.
On the other hand, the "single divergence" in the hardfork keeps growing
forever (unless all miners evetually upgrade.
With softforks, we maintain eventual consistency, with hardforks we don't.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150930/54749cdd/attachment.html>;
Jorge Timón [ARCHIVE] /
npub1fx…cl2d8
2023-06-07 17:41:39
in reply to nevent1q…qsu2
Author Public Key
npub1fx98zxt3lzspjs5f4msr0fxysx5euucm29ghysryju7vpc9j0jzqtcl2d8Published at
2023-06-07 17:41:39Event JSON
{
"id": "ca2af3b67723e434330c939eb7a308bd481062c82a999fbb50aeb6c37965b5e8",
"pubkey": "498a711971f8a0194289aee037a4c481a99e731b5151724064973cc0e0b27c84",
"created_at": 1686159699,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"f5bb1bf208994917ac3ec4154383520df2a8573df815c54d28bae4e41ef024c8",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"1a796a0a3ada43c4ac06d35828b8bc32215c39146989a3e22194d945b39aa3a0",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f2c95df3766562e3b96b79a0254881c59e8639f23987846961cf55412a77f6f2"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-09-30\n📝 Original message:On Sep 30, 2015 9:56 PM, \"Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev\" \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e Jorge has said soft forks always lead to network convergence. No, they\ndon't. You get constant mini divergences until everyone has upgraded, as\nopposed to a single divergence with a hard fork (until everyone has\nupgraded). The quantity of invalid blocks mined, on the other hand, is\nidentical in both types.\n\nExactly, all those \"mini divergences\" eventually disappear (because we're\nassuming the hashrate majority has upgraded and non-upgraded miners accept\nupgraded blocks as valid), even if the hashrate minority never upgrades.\nOn the other hand, the \"single divergence\" in the hardfork keeps growing\nforever (unless all miners evetually upgrade.\nWith softforks, we maintain eventual consistency, with hardforks we don't.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150930/54749cdd/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "c7b6573caf925b4d6e34f4478934c6ff203be7ecde1369e89c60f2d660a1cad380b78088d42d8f63e96232ab694ffc21c4992c8ae29a287073e1183c5df093d0"
}