[Bitcoin-segwit2x] F2Pool backing out of NYA - Fork still happening?

Mike Belshe mike at bitgo.com
Sat Oct 14 17:13:01 UTC 2017

Hey Adam -

Your long and winding messages are often hard to follow ;-)

A few succinct replies:
   a) The SPV wallets will follow the longest chain; if Core diverges from
the longest chain, Core will be alienating 15+million wallets.  I think
this is a shame, but I know we disagree.

   b) Counter to your claim, BTC1 is not changing up to 5 days before the
fork.  It's an open source project, so I don't control it, but general
sentiment is that it is done for now.  The team prefers to keep it stable
rather than add various opt-in replay protections that both sides seem to
not like anyway.

   c) You claim that "most smart phone wallets" will not follow the longest
chain.  I believe this is untrue.  Can you tell me which wallets you're
referring to?


On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 4:19 AM, Dr Adam Back via Bitcoin-segwit2x <
bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> A lot of what you described doesn't work the way you seem to expect.
> There's a few levels:
> Mining economics: I do some mining, and there are a number of data
> points from alt-coins that share mining algorithms: miners short / mid
> term mine what is profitable. That is driven by relative price.
> Difficulty adjusts to equilibrium.  This is a feature, it is the
> incentive that secures blockchains. Bitcoin security works by
> economically incentivised creation of valid blocks as measured by the
> nodes on the network.
> Nodes and wallets mechanically todays software: Existing full nodes
> won't follow.  Most smart phone wallets will not automatically switch
> but either ignore a new chain, stop functioning, go into some kind of
> warning state pending bugfix, some older wallets may get stuck on
> random chain. And because there is no proper replay protection
> randomly transactions will be made on one or both chains unless mixed
> with new coinbase over time.  That will be pretty disruptive because
> people writing wallet software don't know what segwit2x code will be
> as they keep changing.  Bitcoin cash changed up to 5days before
> release.
> Services: Also it's a big job to defend all existing all existing
> services and wallets.  Never the less as both chains have value each
> service and wallet must over time offer some solution even if it is
> replay protected withdrawal.  So nothing is achieved in practice vs
> proper replay protection other than disruption.
> Due Care & safety: Doing reckless and risky things to the network may
> not be a good advertisement for service or wallet.  Users will
> research and make some decision about which wallets and services will
> preserve their coins and allow them to split and sell or hold
> whichever of the 3 or 4 spinoffs are created.  People will likely not
> recommend software and services that promote dand advocated for
> creating the disruption and risk.
> Financial, support tickets: users will complain via support tickets
> and formal complaints about experience and asset loss as that happens.
> Would be interested in proponents views of how their companies (if
> they have users) will handle this, and also how they suppose different
> use cases from other services and wallets will interoperate.
> It sort of feels like there is an expected game-theory reaction here
> that no one is talking about, but maybe people have different views of
> what the logical game theory is?
> ps please trip replies list posts are bouncing as too large.
> Adam
> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 2:20 AM, Ben Peters via Bitcoin-segwit2x
> <bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of the
> > NYA/Segwit2x endeavour. What is happening here is that an alternative,
> > minimally modified, version of the Bitcoin code is being developed that
> will
> > implement a change that has long been sought by the mining community and
> > many in industry and beyond (a change that they presumably feel is
> important
> > for the future success of Bitcoin and thus their respective investments).
> >
> > That candidate code will be offered to the miners and mining pools, who
> may
> > or may not opt to apply hashing power to it. If they apply more than the
> > threshold amount of hashing power, then that new code will effectively
> > takeover from the previous consensus rule, and take most SPV wallets and
> > economic activity along with it.
> >
> > Rather than lobbying this technical working group to “call off” their
> > efforts, your time might be better spent lobbying the miners. The
> function
> > of this group is to produce candidate code, thus fulfilling the
> obligations
> > as set out under the NYA.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list
> Bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x


*Mike Belshe*
*CEO, BitGo, Inc*408-718-6885
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-segwit2x/attachments/20171014/68d37417/attachment.html>

More information about the Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list