Bitcoin Forum
June 03, 2024, 05:09:57 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: For fork's sake, what's the worst that can happen?  (Read 329 times)
bitterbug (OP)
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 78
Merit: 10


View Profile
March 21, 2017, 08:10:58 PM
 #1

If consumers are better-off in the presence of openly competing forces, at least in the mid-to-longer run, what is the worst that can come of a hard fork?

Wouldn't separate experiments : one for bigger blocks and another for alternative solutions to transaction latency whilst maintaining decentralization, make us all winners once it becomes clear which approach could best be leveraged to defeat Bitcoin's real enemies? 

I won't claim to have looked at the problem from every angle, so please highlight any glaring problems with a hard fork I may be missing.
Holliday
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120
Merit: 1010



View Profile
March 21, 2017, 08:20:00 PM
 #2

There are basically two reasons, off the top of my head, that people consider a contentious fork as dangerous.

One is that two coins competing for Bitcoin's market share will both be using the same proof of work, which could get ugly when it comes to 51% attacks, et cetera.

Another is that the resulting chaos will erode Bitcoin's value entirely, regardless of the outcome.

If you aren't the sole controller of your private keys, you don't have any bitcoins.
Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3430
Merit: 3074



View Profile
March 21, 2017, 08:25:46 PM
 #3

It comes down to the same thing with every hard-fork proposed by an external programming team.


They all, XT, Classic and BU, refuse to write their code in a way that minimises disruption, they insist on leaving inter-chain attacks possible. They are determined to force an all-or-nothing situation on the users, where inter-chain attacks prevent the 2 chains from operating in parallel and competing without interference.

Vires in numeris
calkob
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 520


View Profile
March 21, 2017, 09:38:04 PM
 #4

If consumers are better-off in the presence of openly competing forces, at least in the mid-to-longer run, what is the worst that can come of a hard fork?

Wouldn't separate experiments : one for bigger blocks and another for alternative solutions to transaction latency whilst maintaining decentralization, make us all winners once it becomes clear which approach could best be leveraged to defeat Bitcoin's real enemies? 

I won't claim to have looked at the problem from every angle, so please highlight any glaring problems with a hard fork I may be missing.

This is exactly what i have been thinking all day, and to be honest if any off my friends and family ask about this i will be explaining that bitcoin is open source and this sort of thing is a feature of open source software,  its a feature not a bug......Smiley
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!