Cold Storage + Fork = ???

[BananaMigration]

Hola, Gentlemen (and perhaps Lady),

Is there anything I need to be on the ready for in case of a hard fork regrading my paper wallet stored coins? I tried searching around and figuring this out on my own, unfortunately, I need to raise the white flag and ask for help understanding this.

Basically, are my coins safe and still usable on the new fork in the case of a hard fork of the network? Is there anything I need to do to ensure that my paper coins are "bona fide" and accounted for on the new fork, or, since the transaction already exists in the block chain, I have no need to worry? My thinking is that forking only affects new blocks/transaction post-fork, so I should be good.

However, If I don't need to worry about anything because the coins are already allocated to my keys in the block chain, is there something stopping me from spending coins on each of the new networks, assuming a fork?


I'm assuming there will be a hard fork in the future (who knows when though), per Gavin's reasoning regarding raising the block size limit and just want to be sure I'm clear on whatever I need to do to prepare or execute on.



Thanks.

[1714989424]

1714989424

[odolvlobo]

There is no danger. Your coins will be yours in both forks since the forks will share the portion of the blockchain before the fork.

[BurtW]

If there is a hard fork your coins get doubled!  You get to spend the same coins on both forks.  Sometimes I wish all these "let's fork because I don't like ___________" folks would just try it.

[BananaMigration]

Thanks fellas. Makes sense. I appreciate the help.


Just a final clarification, please:


So, the cold storage/paper coins are safe because they've been accounted for on the block chain (pre-fork). Understood. Got it.

Regarding BurtW's response (re: "your coins get doubled! You get to spend the same coins on both forks"):

I'm assuming that if I'm running my node on Fork1 and send coins to another address in Fork1, that this will have no affect on coins in my wallet that are on Fork2.

Assuming I were to then run my node on Fork2, I would still control my coins in those keys which I had spent in Fork1, because these coins haven't been moved in this separate block chain. They're two separate continuing ledgers, so spends wouldn't be accounted between the two (and thus, its impossible to spend/send coins between the two). Correct?

Sorry if I'm not explaining it clear enough.



Note: I understand that in all likelihood, one of the forks would ultimately become the defacto, and the other would simply die off, as no one would be running a node on the lesser of the forks, rendering coins on the un-utilized fork effectively worthless. But my question remains, if for no other reason than as a thought experiment and point of clarification for myself.

[BananaMigration]

Never mind, figured it out.


Thanks again!

[DeathAndTaxes]

It is actually somewhat of a challenge to spend pre fork coins on one fork only.  A fork is caused by some of the network using an alternate chain (of blocks).  Transaction which are not yet in a block would be relayed by nodes on each fork unless the tx is invalid on that fork.

One way to make a tx invalid on one fork is to include newly minted coins which can only exist on one side of the fork (because the other side has a different block and thus different coins).

[BananaMigration]

Three Hero Members helping out a noob! Fucking class act around here - even considering the trolls and the children running around...


Thanks fellas.

[DannyHamilton]

It is actually somewhat of a challenge to spend pre fork coins on one fork only.  A fork is caused by some of the network using an alternate chain (of blocks).  Transaction which are not yet in a block would be relayed by nodes on each fork unless the tx is invalid on that fork.

One way to make a tx invalid on one fork is to include newly minted coins which can only exist on one side of the fork (because the other side has a different block and thus different coins).

If the two forks are communicating with each other (and a transaction that is sent on one fork gets automatically broadcast to both forks) then you're right, one good way to make a transaction invalid on one fork (and double your coins) is to include in the first of the two transactions coins that are minted after the split.

On the other hand, if the fork includes changes that prevent the average "reference" node from broadcasting transactions between the two forks, you can use your two clients (one from each fork of the source code) and create two separate addresses of your own (one in each client).  Then use each client to send the entire balance to your new address on each fork.  Once each transaction gets confirmed in its respective fork, you'll have an output in each fork that is completely incompatible with the other fork.  As such, you'll be able to spend your bitcoins completely separately on each fork.