node numbers are easy to fake, proof of work is not
segwit had overwhelming consensus, bip110 is not even close
your chart leaves out the most likely outcome: bip110 has barely any hash rate at activation, chains split, a small group of miners limp the chain along, while people try to threaten miners to switch to bip110 to reorg the main chain
Login to reply
Replies (2)
What kind of alternate history do you live in?
Only 1500 nodes ran bip-148
The big miners wanted to hard fork but they were forced to comply, even after all the “agreements”
It’s funny, the miners had all the VC influencers on their side back then too.
It didn’t make a difference 😉
It’s insane to me that anyone would listen to this guy: he runs a bitcoin “think tank” which is in direct opposition to node consensus.
The deepest irony is that BPI lobbying Washington is fundamentally anti-cypherpunk. The whole point of Bitcoin was that you don’t need to lobby anyone. The protocol is the policy. The moment you’re sending representatives to Washington to explain Bitcoin to politicians, you’ve accepted that state legitimacy matters - which is the exact opposite of what Satoshi built.
Node runners don’t give a fuck if you wasted 100 million fiat dollars for some corporate and government bullshit.
Nodes are the heart and soul of decentralization of bitcoin. Bitcoin was specifically engineered so none of these corporate levers exist. No third party gets to decide what the protocol is or what is spam. There’s no board. No CEO. No ministry of Bitcoin. The protocol doesn’t care what a think tank thinks.
#bip110
View quoted note →