Some people are under the impression that the miners are in control of bitcoin, and could implement a hardfork.Let's play out what happens if 95% of the miners implement a hardfork. Two block chains emerge, a fast growing hard-forked one, and a slower nonhardforked one. If the hardfork isn't accepted by clients, the lower height one is accepted. Height is only for distinguishing between valid blocks. Clients will reject invalid blocks regardless of how much hashing was used. If the clients don't accept the hard fork, miners will then either revoke the hardfork or run out of money.So, what do I mean by the "clients"? Whichever has the larger economy. (Worst comes to worst, it splits into two currencies, but I'm pretty sure that it would simply be the matter of the larger economy winning out rather quickly, as major exchanges figure out which blockchain their users see as real.)It goes the other way as well. If the clients hardfork, and only 5% of the miners accept it, those are the only 5% of the miners that survive.Remember, hash power is for verification, not voting. That's why miner centralization isn't particularly dangerous, and Satoshi wasn't worried about it. If Bitcoin changes at all, it is only through broad economic consensus. via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/29dsqoN
No comments :
Post a Comment