Quote from: jbreher on July 24, 2018, 06:49:13 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on July 20, 2018, 05:07:57 AM

Quote from: jbreher on July 19, 2018, 07:45:55 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on July 19, 2018, 06:20:34 AM

Quote from: jbreher on July 18, 2018, 06:00:50 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on July 18, 2018, 05:42:40 AM

Quote from: jbreher on July 17, 2018, 07:49:46 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on July 17, 2018, 05:58:20 AM

Quote from: jbreher on July 16, 2018, 05:54:29 PM

Quote

"They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them. Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism."
- 'Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System', Satoshi Nakamoto

The words of Satoshi. Do you believe we should follow it like a religion?

No. At least not just because they are The Words Of Satoshi. But it does concisely explain how Bitcoin actually operates. No matter how much bloviating is directed to the incorrect impression that non-mining entities have any enforcement power over the chain consensus, the design decision of the miners determining the rules is unchanged. As it should.

But that is not the case on how Bitcoin operates today.

You are incorrect. It is exactly how bitcoin operates today.

Ok so from your point of view it was the miners that agreed and decided to activate Segwit without outside pressure?

Whether or not subject to outside pressure, it was indeed the miners that activated The SegWit Omnibus Changeset.

That did not answer the question. Did or did the miners not succumb from outside pressure and went along to activate Segwit? Or do you believe they did the decision by themselves?

Yes, it answered the question fully. There is no way of knowing what the motivation of any party is, as that is internal to their mind only. All we can know is what happened - which is that miners activated Segwit.

We know what the answer is. If the miners activate it under their own prerogative, it would have activated some months before August, 2017. But you are free to believe what you believe.

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Hypothetical situation, what if the miners disagree with the economic majority in activating something and the economic majority announces that it will activate and enforce it themselves and take the risk of a chain split?

In such a case, it would be a Mexican standoff until one or the other groups capitulates. There is no a priori way to determine which group would cave. For while it is true that a chain that nobody wants (as if it would be nobody) is worthless, similarly a chain that cannot be traded upon is also worthless.

But a more important question to ask would be why it is that you think that non-mining, validating entities -- the most Sybil-able group in the ecosystem -- has anything to do whatsoever with economic power?

But that was not what I was asking. I was asking about the importance of non-mining nodes enforcing the rules and validating transactions and blocks themselves. If there was "economic power" that would come with it, it would be secondary or a side effect.

No. See my bolding of your quote. You were not asking about the importance of non-mining validators. You asked about a divergence between miners' desires, and desires of the economic majority. You seem to me to imply that non-mining validator count is an indication of economic majority. If this indeed be your claim, I call bullshit. Non-mining validators are a trivial cost to spin up any number of sybil clones. As opposed to mining power or demonstrated coin hodlings.

Nevertheless, I am asking why you think non-mining validator count has any bearing on a measurement of 'economic majority'?

But if the miners came to decide to do a Sybil attack because it is "easy", do you believe that the economic majority running non-mining nodes will follow? Would it not cause another chain-split? Do you really believe that the miner's chain will be called "the Bitcoin"?

Why are you dodging my question? Answer the question I posed to you above.

And again, you seem to be laboring under some delusion that non-mining validators have some relation to economic power. What is your justification for this assumption?

All exchanges run their own nodes. All the merchants also run nodes. There are users who run nodes to have their own view of the blockchain and to validate transactions. Any node not following the rules will be rejected. Do you believe the miners have all the "power" and expect the everyone to follow whatever they want to do in the network without risking a chain split?

Quote from: mymenace on July 25, 2018, 01:01:41 AM

Quote from: jbreher on July 24, 2018, 11:53:21 PM

Quote from: mymenace on July 24, 2018, 07:05:17 AM

You do realize who you are arguing with

Haha. I gotta ask. Just whoop you think I am?

A paid shill

does not matter what you believe in

Future proves past

nice timing

Do they pay in Bitcoin Cash or Bitcoin? Haha.