pull down to refresh

235 sats \ 3 replies \ @k00b 27 Jun \ on: Hunter Beast - Dev, Rust, Bitcoin AMA

My steelman of what I see BIP 110 proponents arguing:

  1. bip 110 is strictly good for bitcoin as money whether it fully solves the arbitrary data problem or not
  2. the arbitrary data problem on bitcoin is existential, ie if we don't fix it bitcoin fails
  3. there's no harm in attempting such a soft fork or, if there is harm, it is tiny relative to the harm of allowing arbitrary data on bitcoin

Did I miss anything? How would you improve my steelman?

write
compose
200 sats \ 2 replies \ @cryptoquick OP 27 Jun

There is so much more ground to cover, but honestly, the best point I have so far in support is a game theoretic one (as much as midwit devs like TheBlueMatt find such arguments to be unconvincing):

Whenever we have a soft fork that significantly tightens consensus rules in such a way that makes the chain more defensible against real, actual threats to the protocol, it introduces a powerful game theoretic advantage that could be used to force activation of the more defensible chain.

reply
112 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 27 Jun

Have you written, or has someone else written, about this powerful game theoretic advantage and how it's used to force activation? If so, could you point me to it. If not, could you describe it for me?

reply
225 sats \ 0 replies \ @cryptoquick OP 27 Jun

That work is still ongoing. I will be happy to post that here on SN once that's finished, @k00b <3

reply