Since it is and always has been possible, it's indifferent wich group does it, even without this proposal(wich I'm against at least without strong consensus) a nation state or other attacker could make a SF version that is more "safe" and convince other or have many attackers running his version. what will decide is economic actors and POW.
Replies (2)
Yes, it is indifferent which group does it, as long as it gets enough traction to change the consensus rules of Bitcoin.
If it does, then I'll care about the consequences since I own Bitcoin.
I don't know what your point is, but good luck.
My point is this is not a new attack vector, it was always possible and something that would/could happen at any point, even if this SF doesn't go through the same might happen in the future for any other reason. It's not a precedent in the sense of some new attack. If this happens it also concerns me as it should any hodler, the thing is Bitcoin must be able to survive this scenarios otherwise it would be DOA. In this scenario i believe everythingis against the SF.
