Bitcoin.com almost forks the blockchain with buggy BU

[Invincible]

leaving the connection open would have done no harm because core nodes already rejected the block.. and the block drama was over in 3 seconds.

What I ask myself is why did BU nodes allow to screw themselves up, so core nodes should intervene to prevent a catastrophe. No sir, It doesn't characterise BU team as reliable profy

[vapourminer]

because the BU nodes were banned for 24 hours does this mean during that time that any pools that used BU and then found a valid block on the valid chain (assuming they switched to the valid chain eventually) would be lost as they could not broadcast it to the majority nodes?

[ranochigo]

because the BU nodes were banned for 24 hours does this mean during that time that any pools that used BU and then found a valid block on the valid chain (assuming they switched to the valid chain eventually) would be lost as they could not broadcast it to the majority nodes?

Likely not. Once the connection is dropped, the node will find another node to connect to. The ban doesn't apply to all the nodes in the network, each will have their individual ban list.

As long as the miner have at least a Core node connected, they should be fine.

[manselr]

BU doesn't work. It sounds good in practice, "wow automatically adjusted blockchain? just what we need" but in practice it opens a can of worms. Too many possible attack vectors.

If it was as easy I would support a dynamic blocksize, I don't because there are big tradeoffs by doing so that I don't want to deal with. I want to be able to find my bitcoin on my wallet 20 years from now. BU does not give me that peace of mind. They will fuck up hard.

[franky1]

What I ask myself is why did BU nodes allow to screw themselves up, so core nodes should intervene to prevent a catastrophe. No sir, It doesn't characterise BU team as reliable profy

it was a reject.
it would have always been a reject.
it was handled and pushed the side in 3 seconds.
it would have always been pushed the side in 3 seconds.

by the way
https://blockchain.info/orphaned-blocks
care to comment about the other rejects/orphans? that happen alot
oh wait they are core based. im guessing you wont comment

[franky1]

BU doesn't work. It sounds good in practice, "wow automatically adjusted blockchain? just what we need" but in practice it opens a can of worms. Too many possible attack vectors.

If it was as easy I would support a dynamic blocksize, I don't because there are big tradeoffs by doing so that I don't want to deal with. I want to be able to find my bitcoin on my wallet 20 years from now. BU does not give me that peace of mind. They will fuck up hard.

do you even understand bitcoin or consensus.

you do know funds are locked to private keys.
an orphan/reject cannot steal your funds.

but blockstreams future feature mimble wimble can.

its worth reading and learning

but start at the basics of consensus vs bilateral.
as thats what im seeing most r/bitcoin script readers and blocksteam king defenders are mainly not understanding. plus it doesnt take years to learn. so theres no excuse to not spend just 30 minutes learning about consensus(majority agreement stay together) vs bilateral(walk in separate direction splits)

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

Must see:

https://twitter.com/WhalePanda/status/826418860731535360

lol rekt 

Icebreaker is the last person I would expect to endorse a Peter R gif.

[manselr]

BU doesn't work. It sounds good in practice, "wow automatically adjusted blockchain? just what we need" but in practice it opens a can of worms. Too many possible attack vectors.

If it was as easy I would support a dynamic blocksize, I don't because there are big tradeoffs by doing so that I don't want to deal with. I want to be able to find my bitcoin on my wallet 20 years from now. BU does not give me that peace of mind. They will fuck up hard.

do you even understand bitcoin or consensus.

you do know funds are locked to private keys.
an orphan/reject cannot steal your funds.

but blockstreams future feature mimble wimble can.

its worth reading and learning

but start at the basics of consensus vs bilateral.
as thats what im seeing most r/bitcoin script readers and blocksteam king defenders are mainly not understanding. plus it doesnt take years to learn. so theres no excuse to not spend just 30 minutes learning about consensus(majority agreement stay together) vs bilateral(walk in separate direction splits)

What I do know is BU is shit and nobody that wants to keep holding their digital gold for +1 decade is going to want any of those developers taking the main role of the network, jeopardizing their digital gold holdings by replacing a strong solid bunker with plastic elastic walls.

[franky1]

taking the main role of the network,

if you think devs of any implementation should take the main role. you have already surrendered and missed out on what bitcoin is all about.

you have already given up your independence.
please learn consensus, redeem yourself