📅 Original date posted:2015-12-18
📝 Original message:On Dec 18, 2015 2:13 AM, "sickpig at gmail.com" <sickpig at gmail.com> wrote:
> 1.75 x 0.5 + 1 x 0.5 = 1.375
>
> after six month.
>
> An hard-fork on the others side would bring 1.75 since the activation, am
I right?
Yes.
However, SW immediately gives a 1.75 capacity increase for anyone who
adopts it, after the softfork, instantly. They don't need to wait for
anyone else.
A hard fork is an orthogonal improvement, which is also needed if we don't
want to be stuck with a constant maximum ultimately.
Hardforks can however only be deployed at a time when all full node
software can reasonably have agreed to upgrade, while a softfork can be
deployed much earlier.
They are independent improvements, and we need both. I am however of the
opinion that hard forks need a much clearer consensus and much longer
rollout timeframes to be safe (see my thread on the security of softforks).
--
Pieter
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151218/5a9ace37/attachment.html>;
Pieter Wuille [ARCHIVE] /
npub1tj…jtl6r
2023-06-07 17:46:23
in reply to nevent1q…ech7
Author Public Key
npub1tjephawh7fdf6358jufuh5eyxwauzrjqa7qn50pglee4tayc2ntqcjtl6rPublished at
2023-06-07 17:46:23Event JSON
{
"id": "c9c9ad0c7e3938ff1c9f4d8268b60e7205b35bca3840139bbf4056ab236be975",
"pubkey": "5cb21bf5d7f25a9d46879713cbd32433bbc10e40ef813a3c28fe7355f49854d6",
"created_at": 1686159983,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"d58ef5f27c55f40f82225aaaf9d4842ef2ec79260053b36e96980654a30d74c7",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"401dfa28d889b3d27839c144cc729a0364cc5e2aa586125c73862af43015c05d",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"6d57865557024df52765583218ef3ffec184f7423a66f5284d92b8851cbca430"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-12-18\n📝 Original message:On Dec 18, 2015 2:13 AM, \"sickpig at gmail.com\" \u003csickpig at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e 1.75 x 0.5 + 1 x 0.5 = 1.375\n\u003e\n\u003e after six month.\n\u003e\n\u003e An hard-fork on the others side would bring 1.75 since the activation, am\nI right?\n\nYes.\n\nHowever, SW immediately gives a 1.75 capacity increase for anyone who\nadopts it, after the softfork, instantly. They don't need to wait for\nanyone else.\n\nA hard fork is an orthogonal improvement, which is also needed if we don't\nwant to be stuck with a constant maximum ultimately.\n\nHardforks can however only be deployed at a time when all full node\nsoftware can reasonably have agreed to upgrade, while a softfork can be\ndeployed much earlier.\n\nThey are independent improvements, and we need both. I am however of the\nopinion that hard forks need a much clearer consensus and much longer\nrollout timeframes to be safe (see my thread on the security of softforks).\n\n-- \nPieter\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151218/5a9ace37/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "fd5e6fb542d1c2642fe8c245811aabe7c48b08730732f62101f29fb56a66e258d49eabf9f12e8d4fc77fd46a908018f17dead1e7906b6e999d08c303608fb2b9"
}