Sheer number of nodes running forked code doesn't matter. What matters is the number of nodes actually being used to facilitate transactions.
For instance, if I have 1000 nodes, but only use one of them for broadcasting transactions, then it doesn't really matter what code my other 999 nodes are running, the only node I am actually using is the one that counts.
Same thing goes for mining. Say those two pools both agree they think the forked code is what they want Bitcoin to be, and so they move ALL their hashrate to the fork. Doesn't mean jack if there aren't enough actual users broadcasting transactions from nodes running that code. It would make blocks come in slower on the non-forked nodes, but that's about it. And I doubt these pools would be so rash as to move all of their hashrate. Rather, they would hedge their bets. And since the miners on each of those pools may not agree with their decision, they may lose a significant amount of hashrate to pools that aren't supporting the fork, unless they provide an option to continue mining on the non-forked chain.
Bottom line is, whoever is behind the fork will have to convince a majority of actual users to run the forked code and consider it to be the real #Bitcoin for their transactions. Additional nodes that don't have real users attached to them are meaningless.
Dikaios1517
npub1ku…v3lhe
2024-10-21 18:48:06
in reply to nevent1q…3wcm
Author Public Key
npub1kun5628raxpm7usdkj62z2337hr77f3ryrg9cf0vjpyf4jvk9r9smv3lhePublished at
2024-10-21 18:48:06Event JSON
{
"id": "4193378c12d815e4c8ca14dc02ee22d6bc82d969e6714eca83fcb8abac470398",
"pubkey": "b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb",
"created_at": 1729536486,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"t",
"bitcoin"
],
[
"e",
"9a37b061e50f00b96d3cdca72a116d875a4d4dfef315198e5232a67f60d70433",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"9a37b061e50f00b96d3cdca72a116d875a4d4dfef315198e5232a67f60d70433",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"d0708145385945396191f427e1346bb54c89411fef87bd3447510b0276171fb6",
"",
"mention"
],
[
"client",
"noStrudel",
"31990:266815e0c9210dfa324c6cba3573b14bee49da4209a9456f9484e5106cd408a5:1686066542546"
]
],
"content": "Sheer number of nodes running forked code doesn't matter. What matters is the number of nodes actually being used to facilitate transactions.\n\nFor instance, if I have 1000 nodes, but only use one of them for broadcasting transactions, then it doesn't really matter what code my other 999 nodes are running, the only node I am actually using is the one that counts.\n\nSame thing goes for mining. Say those two pools both agree they think the forked code is what they want Bitcoin to be, and so they move ALL their hashrate to the fork. Doesn't mean jack if there aren't enough actual users broadcasting transactions from nodes running that code. It would make blocks come in slower on the non-forked nodes, but that's about it. And I doubt these pools would be so rash as to move all of their hashrate. Rather, they would hedge their bets. And since the miners on each of those pools may not agree with their decision, they may lose a significant amount of hashrate to pools that aren't supporting the fork, unless they provide an option to continue mining on the non-forked chain.\n\nBottom line is, whoever is behind the fork will have to convince a majority of actual users to run the forked code and consider it to be the real #Bitcoin for their transactions. Additional nodes that don't have real users attached to them are meaningless.",
"sig": "3874408d9c9cd5d39c98957d16c37e16221c44c768321f7413e88a1e349fcb063759f090e194f5281fe4aa4dfd44d5b8827f8813fcf5c7517c033b533f9a5180"
}