Quote from: brg444 on November 14, 2015, 05:10:32 PM

Quote from: Peter R on November 14, 2015, 05:00:28 PM

Quote from: brg444 on November 14, 2015, 04:58:50 PM

Quote from: Peter R on November 14, 2015, 04:40:38 PM

Quote from: brg444 on November 14, 2015, 02:38:30 PM

Quote from: Peter R on November 14, 2015, 05:35:37 AM

Quote from: brg444 on November 13, 2015, 09:28:02 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on November 13, 2015, 09:18:23 PM

Either decisions are made using proof of work or they are not.

Bitcoin consensus does not comes about through proof of work [longest chain]

If the nodes and miners reject a block as invalid then it would not persist as the longest chain. If the nodes and miners accept a block and continue to build on top of it, then that chain is Bitcoin.

Proof-of-work both enforces and defines the laws of the systems

Proof-of-work exists to order transactions deemed valid by the consensus of rules dictated by the nodes.

For the millionth time it's the longest *valid* chain you disingenuous fuck

I agree. Nodes will only accept and miners will only build upon a chain that contains valid blocks. A chain that persists as the longest and continues to be built upon must be valid.

Except that's not true as was evidenced by the July 4th forks in which 5 consecutive invalid blocks were mined on top of each others.

Same is also true for the March 2013 fork.

It was true: miners and nodes abandoned those chains and they did not persist as the longest.

Great, so we agree that miners hold no power over what constitutes the longest valid chain.