[Bitcoin-segwit2x] PROPOSAL: B0RG (Bitcoin zero replay, guarantee) - Ensuring a smooth 2X upgrade without a chain split

Hjalmar Peters Hjalmar.Peters at gmx.de
Fri Oct 27 00:08:00 UTC 2017

Your confidence relies on miners being driven exclusively by economic incentives. However, maybe some Chinese miners have to obey instructions from their government, and maybe this government prefers to see Bitcoin failed. Even if considered unlikely, given the consequences, it might be worth keeping the possibility of large reorgs in mind. (I warned about this scenario before in https://medium.com/@HjalmarPeters/the-big-blockers-bead6027deb2 )
Von: bitcoin-segwit2x-bounces at lists.linuxfoundation.org [mailto:bitcoin-segwit2x-bounces at lists.linuxfoundation.org] Im Auftrag von Alex Morcos via Bitcoin-segwit2x
Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. Oktober 2017 19:42
An: Vinny Lingham
Cc: Melvin Carvalho via Bitcoin-segwit2x
Betreff: Re: [Bitcoin-segwit2x] PROPOSAL: B0RG (Bitcoin zero replay, guarantee) - Ensuring a smooth 2X upgrade without a chain split
If we start seeing 6-block deep reorgs because miners are attempting to pull off a double-spend attack then I think the fundamental economic incentives of Bitcoin will be shown to have failed and we might as well all go home.  It's somewhat reasonable to come to differing opinions on what's long term economically rational for miners as to which fork to mine, but it's clearly very detrimental to the future utility of Bitcoin to try double spend attacks.  I'm quite confident we will not see that.
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Vinny Lingham via Bitcoin-segwit2x <bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
I’d love to get a sense of what the hash rate threshold will be for exchanges to stop accepting 1x coin, even with 6 confirmations? With the risk of a selfish mining attack increasing the lower the 1x hashrate is, why would an exchange accept the coins knowing that someone could be double spending across multiple exchanges?
I’m just trying to understand this attack vector better... I haven’t heard a good response to this question yet - would really appreciate some insight here. This is largely why I believe hashrate secures the network and why I’ve been against the UASF.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-segwit2x/attachments/20171026/b386c663/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list