[Bitcoin-development] questions about bitcoin-XT code fork & non-consensus hard-fork

[Sean Lynch]

Which means that those with a stake in Bitcoin are better off if a fork
becomes popular than if an altcoin does, because if a fork becomes popular
they will already have a stake in the fork, whereas if the altcoin becomes
popular at the expense of Bitcoin they will have nothing. Of course, if a
fork undermines faith in Bitcoin without becoming popular, everyone will be
screwed. But I don't think this is likely; either it will become popular
and we'll all be better off, or it will flop and nobody will care.

The worst case scenario is that some fatal flaw eventually emerges in
Bitcoin, one that would not have affected a proposed fork or altcoin but
that instead wipes out Bitcoin holders and undermines faith in all
cryptocurrencies.

On Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 15:52 Sean Lynch <seanl at literati.org> wrote:

> That's why I said "their money and...", but you're right, the "and"
> doesn't need to be there. Just the money.
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 15:16 Adam Back <adam at cypherspace.org> wrote:
>
>> It's not the miners that count, rather than economic majority.  It's a
>> surprising fact, but here's how it works: lets imagine 75% of the
>> miners decided they'd change the economic rules, in a protocol
>> incompatible way.  Result: the miners form a new alt-coin with no
>> users.  Bitcoin difficulty adjusts, and carries on as if nothing
>> happened.  The hostile miners earn 25 forkcoins which have  a market
>> price of 0.  They are burning electricity so they either go bankrupt
>> or the give up and rejoin the network.
>>
>> There's a lot to game theory that is subtle.  It could do with a FAQ
>> writing on it really.
>>
>> Adam
>>
>> On 28 June 2015 at 23:04, Sean Lynch <seanl at literati.org> wrote:
>> > By the way, "consensus" is a red herring thrown out by those who never
>> want
>> > there to be a fork. There can never be consensus for a fork, because
>> > otherwise it wouldn't be a fork. Claiming there needs to be consensus is
>> > just a way to try to make it look like any fork is somehow unilateral
>> and
>> > undemocratic. But to succeed, any fork by definition needs broad
>> support. In
>> > fact, it's about the most democratic you can get: people put their
>> money and
>> > their mining power on the fork they want. It's those opposing any fork
>> who
>> > are the authoritarians. Obviously, when you consider who's making the
>> death
>> > threats.
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 3088 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20150629/d0d9f2e8/attachment-0002.txt>