How BIP110 will go down, step by step.

[PepeLapiu]

So if you pay attention to the core side of BIP110, you likely heard ad nauseum how they predict that BIP110 will either fail, be ignored, or just hard fork into "lukecoin". But I'm here to explain the technical details of how it will go down. No spin, no "predictions", just how BIP110 was designed...

We are currently in the MASF period. That is when miners are given the curteousy of activating BIP110 on their own. If 55% of the hash rate signals for BIP110, the fork activates.
So far, less than 1% of miners have signalled for BIP110. But 15% of the nodes are running the BIP110 client.

In early August, we start the mandatory signalling period. That is, miners are required to signal for BIP110 to get on the BIP110 chain. This is when we actually start the forking process. At this point, miners don't really have to do anything other than just flip a version but to indicate they are getting ready for 110. They still can mine any 110 non-compliant blocks at this time.

Around September first, we start actually activating the rules of BIP110. So miners will have to run either the Knots or Core node, so long as it's BIP110 compliant.

Done! At this point, BIP110 either wins or loses.

In my opinion, at this point, there are too many nodes running BIP110 for miners to just ignore us.
If I were a big miner with 20% hashrate, like Foundry or Ant, I would likely wait until the last minute in early August to signal for BIP110 in order to get on the 110 chain.

Because those big miners know very well that anymore than 10% hash rate on the 110 chain would cause a snowball effect. So either one of those two would effectively determine the suscess of 110.

So I would wait until the last minute, and signal to be the first one to get on the 110 chain. Because if 110 activates, you really want to be early, not late. In case of a 110 win, you want to be the earliest possible on the 110 chain. And big miners all know they, any of them, can trigger the snowball by themselves.

 So anyways: miners need to signal and say they are ready in August. And they need to actually start mining with the new rules around Sept 1st.

Get your popcorn guys. This will be fun to watch.

[ertil]

So far, less than 1% of miners have signalled for BIP110. But 15% of the nodes are running the BIP110 client.

If Bitcoin consensus would be based on counting nodes, then Proof of Work would never be needed. You can have millions of nodes, running only on CPUs, without any ASICs. It doesn't change the fact, that you will need some miners, to push your chain forward. Otherwise, the speed of your chain will be proportional to the hashrate split: which means making around one or two blocks per day.

That is, miners are required to signal for BIP110 to get on the BIP110 chain.

They are not "required" or "forced" in any way, to introduce any new rules at all. You think it is true, only because it is written in Knots implementation. But there is no actual enforcement of that in any way. And writing a code, which follows a minority chain, even if a lot of others don't support it, is just risky, and leads to altcoins. If you don't understand it, then you have to just see it in practice.

At this point, miners don't really have to do anything other than just flip a version but to indicate they are getting ready for 110.

If they are not ready, or if they don't want to activate some new rules, then they simply won't switch that bit. To block new rules, you don't have to send any "I don't support it" signal. All that is needed, is simply not activating these new rules. Which is also why Core developers implemented some soft-forks not only in a backward-compatible, but also in a forward-compatible way, by using opcodes like OP_SUCCESS: because it will be harder and harder, to introduce new changes on consensus level, and at some point, it can be impossible, if enough people will consider changing things as too controversial, even if these changes could be beneficial.

They still can mine any 110 non-compliant blocks at this time.

If they won't follow the new rules, then they also won't flip that bit. Which is why the first non-signalling block will split the chain at that point.

Around September first, we start actually activating the rules of BIP110.

Not around September first, but much, much later. After 2016 blocks, signalling for BIP-110. Which means, that with for example 1% hashrate support, it wouldn't take two weeks, but something like 200 weeks instead.

So miners will have to run either the Knots or Core node, so long as it's BIP110 compliant.

Core won't be BIP-110 compliant, because that change was rejected.

I would likely wait until the last minute in early August to signal for BIP110 in order to get on the 110 chain.

Miners have no reason to wait, if they support new rules. Also, in contrast with the prisoner's dilemma, they know exactly, what the competition is doing, because any mining pool operator can always request some block headers from another pool, just to check, which headers are mined by them. Which means, that they don't signal for BIP-110, because they know, that others are also not doing it. They know the hashrate support, even before it is manifested on-chain, because of spy mining, and requesting headers for new, not-yet-mined blocks, from competing pools.

Because if 110 activates, you really want to be early, not late.

If you want to be early, then why the current signalling is at around 1%, and not more? Miners have no reason to wait, if they support the new rules. And they know, what their competitors are doing, because even developers know, how to check it: https://web.archive.org/web/20240916123921/https://b10c.me/observations/12-template-similarity/

[PepeLapiu]

If Bitcoin consensus would be based on counting nodes, then Proof of Work would never be needed. You can have millions of nodes, running only on CPUs, without any ASICs. It doesn't change the fact, that you will need some miners, to push your chain forward. Otherwise, the speed of your chain will be proportional to the hashrate split: which means making around one or two blocks per day.

Winners of the block wars: "Nodes matter too much to impose big blocks"

ertil: "Your node don't matter"

They are not "required" or "forced" in any way, to introduce any new rules at all. You think it is true, only because it is written in Knots implementation. But there is no actual enforcement of that in any way. And writing a code, which follows a minority chain, even if a lot of others don't support it, is just risky, and leads to altcoins. If you don't understand it, then you have to just see it in practice.

If they are not ready, or if they don't want to activate some new rules, then they simply won't switch that bit. To block new rules, you don't have to send any "I don't support it" signal. All that is needed, is simply not activating these new rules. Which is also why Core developers implemented some soft-forks not only in a backward-compatible, but also in a forward-compatible way, by using opcodes like OP_SUCCESS: because it will be harder and harder, to introduce new changes on consensus level, and at some point, it can be impossible, if enough people will consider changing things as too controversial, even if these changes could be beneficial.

Someone needs to look into the history of BIP148 to understand how the mechanics of nodes forcing a fork on miners really works.

If they won't follow the new rules, then they also won't flip that bit. Which is why the first non-signalling block will split the chain at that point.

Miners have absolutely no incentive to reject BIP110, other than maybe lose a very neglibeable amount of miner fees from malware.

Not around September first, but much, much later. After 2016 blocks, signalling for BIP-110. Which means, that with for example 1% hashrate support, it wouldn't take two weeks, but something like 200 weeks instead.

You are misinformed or deliberately spreading lies.

Core won't be BIP-110 compliant, because that change was rejected.

That is false. A core client has already been modified to be BIP110 compliant. Mostly for those suffering from Knots syndrome.

[ertil]

Someone needs to look into the history of BIP148 to understand how the mechanics of nodes forcing a fork on miners really works.

In that case, the hashrate majority eventually started supporting Segwit.

Miners have absolutely no incentive to reject BIP110

By accepting BIP-110, they risk their own coins will be blocked by next BIPs. If you want to block output types, used by Satoshi, then who knows, what else would be blocked in the future.

You are misinformed or deliberately spreading lies.

The code in Knots is based on block heights, not timestamps. Which means, that the rule is not to "activate it on September 1st", but the rule is to "activate it after 2016 blocks, whatever time it would take to mine them". And with the current hashrate on BIP-110 side, it would take much more than two weeks.

A core client has already been modified to be BIP110 compliant.

No, it will simply follow the heaviest chain, without enforcing any BIP-110 rules. And the Pull Request for BIP-110 was closed: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34930

[PepeLapiu]

In that case, the hashrate majority eventually started supporting Segwit.

Yup. 70% of the miners were not interested in handing out 50% discount coupons at a time when miner fees were at an all time high. And half of them knew that Segwit would mean they would lose 20% of their ASIC performance. And Segwit would facilitate LN which would even further take away their miner fees.
.
And only 5% of the nodes basically forced them into adopting Segwit against their will.

This time around, we got 15% of the nodes, and counting. And they have far less to lose by signalling for BIP110.

By accepting BIP-110, they risk their own coins will be blocked by next BIPs.

You are making shit up.

If you want to block output types, used by Satoshi, then who knows, what else would be blocked in the future.

How about you stop making shit up and you find the last tx that was sending to a P2PK output, not malware, not spam, and more than dust spend?

The code in Knots is based on block heights, not timestamps. Which means, that the rule is not to "activate it on September 1st", but the rule is to "activate it after 2016 blocks, whatever time it would take to mine them". And with the current hashrate on BIP-110 side, it would take much more than two weeks.

I said around September 1st, meaning it was an approximation. And yeah, than you for informing me about how time works in bitcoin. What else, mister obvious?

A core client has already been modified to be BIP110 compliant.

And the Pull Request for BIP-110 was closed: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34930

Of course we can expect corrupt core to close that PR.

[DaveF]

Keep in mind most of the larger pools know or at least have a way to get in contact with the people mining to them.

Reaching out to the people who mine there and asking what they want in terms of 110 is as simple as sending an email. Because as we all know for a miner to switch pools really does not take that much work or time.

For pools that don't even collect and email address it's a different story but most larger miners are going to have some sort of contact with the pools.

Why do I point this out? Because way back in Segwit time pools communicated with the miners about 148. Now, about 110 nothing. Some even gave them ways to mine on either one to see who would put their money where their mouth was before the fork. Now because they know that there is no real support for 110, it's not even worth the time or effort to send an email. We are less then 60 50 days from the fork. No exchange has mentioned it, no payment processor has mentioned it, only 1 pool (f2) has mentioned it to say no. Nobody cares, since it's going to be such a minority chain that it does not matter. 

30% or so of the blocks that support 110 claim to be rented hash so it's not like there are miners that invested in infrastructure are fully supporting it. Yes, they could be lying and have a mining farm but why lie and say you are renting? There is no logic to that because it shows that there is even less real support.


-Dave

[PepeLapiu]

I believe that by early August, we will have close to 20% of the nodes.

You guys can ignore all that and keep repeatimg "your node don't matter" while pretending that exchanges and miners are the ones deciding on the rules. But that's delusional.

Core is captured. Core is corrupt. Core needs to go, last week.

And as usual, all you guys have going against BIP110 is the same stupid prediction that we will fail. You have nothing else other than your predictions.

[DaveF]

I believe that by early August, we will have close to 20% of the nodes.

You guys can ignore all that and keep repeatimg "your node don't matter" while pretending that exchanges and miners are the ones deciding on the rules. But that's delusional.

Core is captured. Core is corrupt. Core needs to go, last week.

And as usual, all you guys have going against BIP110 is the same stupid prediction that we will fail. You have nothing else other than your predictions.

However, in this particular thread you were saying "this is how 110 is going to go down"

We then pointed out that most likely no, that is not how it is going to go down.

So, yes here saying that nodes don't matter, and miners (not pools the actual people running the miners) are for the most part the only ones that matter.

Exchanges and other services matter too, since running miners costs a large amount of money and electricity / rent / staff have to get paid. And if you can't convert to local fiat you will have no power to your miners that your landlord tossed out of the building for not paying rent.

If the people who bought and paid money for miners and are now paying to run them wanted to support 110 they could point their miners to ocean, they could point them to anyplace that supports stratum V2 and mine their own template that supports it, they could run their own pool. But, just about nobody does.

So yes, here saying 110 is going to fail is the point.
We all know that it does not stop spam but this is not the place to point that out.

In the old days it was 1 CPU 1 VOTE since you could mine with a CPU. Now it's 1 miner one vote. Same thing, just you have to buy (or rent) a miner.
You want 110, just go buy (or rent) enough miners to make it happen.

-Dave

[PepeLapiu]

We all know that it does not stop spam but this is not the place to point that out.

LOL
You are right! Let's all sit in a circle jerk, refer to malware and spam as "new use cases", and blow open an other filter. Than maybe we could change definitions in the docs to turn a bug into a feature. And go around and say that bitcoin is just a database.

Fucking brilliant!!!

[DaveF]

We all know that it does not stop spam but this is not the place to point that out.

LOL
You are right! Let's all sit in a circle jerk, refer to malware and spam as "new use cases", and blow open an other filter. Than maybe we could change definitions in the docs to turn a bug into a feature. And go around and say that bitcoin is just a database.

Fucking brilliant!!!

Look again you did not stick to the point.
The title of the thread you made:

How BIP110 will go down, step by step.

It will not go down at all that way and you can't make any point with hard data to back up that it will.


-Dave

[PepeLapiu]

Look again you did not stick to the point.

LOL
Now that the subject is about predictions, you don't want to stray away from the subject, when that exactly what you have done for the last 4-5 months?

Look. The point is that BIP110 will not stop all malware. Everyone on every side understands this. But the fact is, BIP110 will absolutely result in far less malware and spam on chain.

And most importantly, BIP110 reverses the core policy of pro-malware, pro-anything but money, pro-bitcoin as a database.

Wake up. Core is extremely compromised.

[Cookdata]

We are currently in the MASF period. That is when miners are given the curteousy of activating BIP110 on their own. If 55% of the hash rate signals for BIP110, the fork activates.
So far, less than 1% of miners have signalled for BIP110. But 15% of the nodes are running the BIP110 client.

Don't you think the numbers is a sign of rejection? I mean we are half way in June, very soon we will be in July and then August, that's less than 2 months and 2 weeks.

This 15%, what happen to it? If my memory serves me right, there was a sudden spike of Bip110 signal to 14% last year, some people argue that this was a result of nodes manipulation. If nodes in large number were interested in Bip110, by now I don't expect it to be sitting in that range of 15%,, it should be bigger than this number, something is not right but what is even right about this BIP110, there is none.

Around September first, we start actually activating the rules of BIP110. So miners will have to run either the Knots or Core node, so long as it's BIP110 compliant.

Done! At this point, BIP110 either wins or loses.

This will be interesting, it's either Ocean mining get more hashrate or this dreams becomes a fantasy on that very day. 

So I would wait until the last minute, and signal to be the first one to get on the 110 chain. Because if 110 activates, you really want to be early, not late. In case of a 110 win, you want to be the earliest possible on the 110 chain. And big miners all know they, any of them, can trigger the snowball by themselves.

 So anyways: miners need to signal and say they are ready in August. And they need to actually start mining with the new rules around Sept 1st.

Get your popcorn guys. This will be fun to watch.

In all of your explanation, you are having high hope than to see bip110 becomes a failure and hope is a not solution, this is an expectation you already accepted rather than look at the both side of "what if it fails or if bip119 win". You didn't consider what if???. There are so many outcomes in that questions that even you can't answer.

[PepeLapiu]

In all of your explanation, you are having high hope than to see bip110 becomes a failure and hope is a not solution, this is an expectation you already accepted rather than look at the both side of "what if it fails or if bip119 win". You didn't consider what if???. There are so many outcomes in that questions that even you can't answer.

I'm not hoping BIP110 will susceed, I know it will.

And again, all you can do is make predictions of BIP110 failures and base your entire argument on those predictions, while never ever addressing what BIP110 actually does.

You can't do that because if you did, you would show yourself as a shitcoiner and spammer.

[PrivacyG]

So far, less than 1% of miners have signalled for BIP110. But 15% of the nodes are running the BIP110 client.

If BIP-110 supporters run Nodes the same way you write Topics, as in a new one every other day about the same subject, then it makes sense.

I read this entire Topic and its replies.  Your own argument is based on a prediction.  A prediction awfully distant from reality but anyway.  Say BIP-110 fails.  What is next for PepeLapiu?

[stompix]

How BIP110 will go down, step by step.

TDLR for anyone curios but too lazy to read:

In early August, we start the mandatory signalling period. That is, miners are required to signal for BIP110 to get on the BIP110 chain. This is when we actually start the forking process. At this point, miners don't really have to do anything other than just flip a version but to indicate they are getting ready for 110.

There is a lot of WE in your talk, and a lot of ordering around and making it look like you're some "Decider" or something, should I bring the Hotdog Hauss organisation chart here, or have you gone so bad that you actually think you're ordering people around now and anyone with a functional synapse is listening?

Exchanges and other services matter too, since running miners costs a large amount of money and electricity / rent / staff have to get paid. And if you can't convert to local fiat you will have no power to your miners that your landlord tossed out of the building for not paying rent. If the people who bought and paid money for miners and are now paying to run them wanted to support 110 they could point their miners to ocean, they could point them to anyplace that supports stratum V2 and mine their own template that supports it, they could run their own pool. But, just about nobody does.

Stop bringing reason to this, is far more fun as a deranged-only topic.

But speaking simple of economics, as an ex-miner, yeah, I can already see it, miners that made the move of accepting 0.1 satoshi fees despite this being pennies, literally pennies as we had ck showing right here, looking at charts showing income per th/s going below 3 cents,  fee in reward staying barely above 0.5 for half a year will now magically do a flip and a flop and kill their business for good with this fork war.

Any moment now!!!!!

[PepeLapiu]

In early August, we start the mandatory signalling period. That is, miners are required to signal for BIP110 to get on the BIP110 chain. This is when we actually start the forking process. At this point, miners don't really have to do anything other than just flip a version but to indicate they are getting ready for 110.

There is a lot of WE in your talk, and a lot of ordering around and making it look like you're some "Decider" or something, should I bring the Hotdog Hauss organisation chart here, or have you gone so bad that you actually think you're ordering people around now and anyone with a functional synapse is listening?

Yes, "we" as in the 25% of nodes who deserted core, and "we" as in the 15% of nodes who are activating this fork.

You didn't have a problem when core decided "we" are removing a malware filter against the enormous pushback.