Quote from: onemorexmr on December 12, 2015, 06:20:26 PM

Quote from: johnyj on December 12, 2015, 06:13:35 PM

Quote from: onemorexmr on December 12, 2015, 06:00:51 PM

IMHO thats only the case if:
- majority of miners runs new version
- satoshi moves his coins to a new address
- majority of miners decide to roll back to old version

or did i miss something?

In this order:

1. Some large miners start to run a new version that can spend satoshi's coin without signature (in new version you can redefine what is a valid transaction)
2. These large miners moved satoshi's coin to their own address in the new version
3. These miners promote the new version to be widely accepted by exchanges and merchants
4. They sell the 1 million coins and gone

Since no one else except Satoshi will notice the difference, and in this case majority of the miners already get Satoshi's coins and be satisfied with the new version. Even Satoshi comes out and protest, it does not make any sense any more

i dont think 3 would work ;-)
why should exchanges and merchants accept such a bitcoin version?

Sorry, I have changed the order a little bit to make it more realistic, they should first push for mass adoption and then do the malicious transaction

Exchanges and merchants accept such a new version simply because they heard that it can bring more transaction capacity, can fix bugs, can reduce the block size and increase performance. etc... And because the code and the implementation is so complex they don't have time to check every detail