Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
Reading between the lines, it appears that infofront may adhere to the following hypothesis:
Once enough value gets bound up in segwit addresses, it becomes an irresistible honeypot. For while those addresses hold value under segwit rules, under the previous protocol rules, they are 'anyonecanspend' transactions. To the extent that the miners collude to roll back the chain, they are free to claim these 'anyonecanspend' TXOUTs for themselves. Every additional UTXO held in a segwit addy is additional incentive for them to behave thusly.
Once done, then the protocol and system would be back to the ersatz immutable 1MB block chain cap.
But hey - we've been over this already.
It's a theory. One which infofront may also not adhere to.
Once enough value gets bound up in segwit addresses, it becomes an irresistible honeypot. For while those addresses hold value under segwit rules, under the previous protocol rules, they are 'anyonecanspend' transactions. To the extent that the miners collude to roll back the chain, they are free to claim these 'anyonecanspend' TXOUTs for themselves. Every additional UTXO held in a segwit addy is additional incentive for them to behave thusly.
Once done, then the protocol and system would be back to the ersatz immutable 1MB block chain cap.
But hey - we've been over this already.
It's a theory. One which infofront may also not adhere to.
You laid that out pretty well. I'm not as certain as Shelby or TMSR that it will happen though.
My biggest concern with that theory is that the honeypot will be devalued after it's taken by the miners, which reduces the incentive to take it. OTOH, the segwit coin airdrop they'd get might make up for any devaluation of the 1MB chain caused by miners taking the 'anyonecanspend' transactions. And what do you think?
I could see your devaluation scenario as one strong possibility.
There is an alternate scenario, whereby the world at large comes to see the entire SegWit Omnibus Changeset period as a hijacking of the real Bitcoin (maybe or maybe not TRB in a TMSR sense), and the return to original protocol as a restoration - a righting of a wrong. In which case, the incident could result in a net increase in value.
I don't know how to evaluate the relative probabilities of such scenarios.
I still think the chain that can provide more utility to more people has the long-term greater value proposition, regardless.