It's Time For a Hard Bitcoin Fork
hackingdistributed.com
It's Time For a Hard Bitcoin Fork
1–10 of 154 posts
Re: It's Time For a Hard Bitcoin Fork
#2Like IPv4, the "experiment" has grown so large that it may be impossible to get consensus on any non-backwards-compatible change.
Re: It's Time For a Hard Bitcoin Fork
#3Like IPv4, the "experiment" has grown so large that it may be impossible to get consensus on any non-backwards-compatible change.
I'm not sure this is true, regardless of how large Bitcoin grows to be. If a significant enough problem were discovered, wouldn't it be in everyone's best interest to protect the value of their wallets by accepting a forked blockchain?
Re: It's Time For a Hard Bitcoin Fork
#4[deleted]
Re: It's Time For a Hard Bitcoin Fork
#5Like IPv4, the "experiment" has grown so large that it may be impossible to get consensus on any non-backwards-compatible change.
> Like IPv4, the "experiment" has grown so large that it may be impossible to get consensus on any non-backwards-compatible change.
How is that an accurate description of IPv4 at all? IPv6 has made monumental progress[0] in a relatively short time (yes, for what we're talking about, it's only been a short amount of time).
Re: It's Time For a Hard Bitcoin Fork
#6Like IPv4, the "experiment" has grown so large that it may be impossible to get consensus on any non-backwards-compatible change.
[deleted]
Re: It's Time For a Hard Bitcoin Fork
#7Like IPv4, the "experiment" has grown so large that it may be impossible to get consensus on any non-backwards-compatible change.
I'm not sure this is true, regardless of how large Bitcoin grows to be. If a significant enough problem were discovered, wouldn't it be in everyone's best interest to protect the value of their wallets by accepting a forked blockchain?
Wouldn't GHash be able to pivot their existing mining power to take 51% of that new blockchain?
Re: It's Time For a Hard Bitcoin Fork
#8Like IPv4, the "experiment" has grown so large that it may be impossible to get consensus on any non-backwards-compatible change.
I'm not sure this is true, regardless of how large Bitcoin grows to be. If a significant enough problem were discovered, wouldn't it be in everyone's best interest to protect the value of their wallets by accepting a forked blockchain?
Tinfoil hat time: But not everyone will automatically comprehend the situation properly. There will be a possibility that media can be manipulated to keep the subvertible network alive and dominant through its network effect, while it is subtly manipulated from behind the scenes. Perhaps this happened before, and will happen again. (I'm talking about pre-Internet financial networks, as well as making a BSG reference. In BSG, if the Cylons were really smart, wouldn't they have taken over the financial and media networks instead of the defense computers? They would have had far more to gain from subtly controlling the wealth of the colonies instead of destroying it. Over time, they could have taken over society from the inside and just replaced everyone with attractive flashy sexbots.)
Re: It's Time For a Hard Bitcoin Fork
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure this is true, regardless of how large Bitcoin grows to be. If a significant enough problem were discovered, wouldn't it be in everyone's best interest to protect the value of their wallets by accepting a forked blockchain?
Wouldn't GHash be able to pivot their existing mining power to take 51% of that new blockchain?
Depends on what changes to the algorithm are involved.
Re: It's Time For a Hard Bitcoin Fork
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure this is true, regardless of how large Bitcoin grows to be. If a significant enough problem were discovered, wouldn't it be in everyone's best interest to protect the value of their wallets by accepting a forked blockchain?
Wouldn't GHash be able to pivot their existing mining power to take 51% of that new blockchain?
An older discussion thread worth considering:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=327767.0