@juscamarena @Excellion Looks like there was a review, but no one caught it. https://t.co/xhLT0uQpKH
@adam3us @Excellion @bhec39 The BU nodes in my logs all claim to have an Excessive Block size set to 4, 8, or 16 MB. Think they’d accept.
@roasbeef @_chjj bruh my coinz so old they growin’ white hair https://t.co/06mdufWSSM
I guess you could say…
(•_•)
( •_•)>âŒâ– -â–
(âŒâ– _â– )
… consensus emerged.
https://t.co/UJkCysTLvr
@Excellion @bhec39 Technically, it was a valid block (on a subset of the BU network) that was orphaned when the Core network ignored it.
@Chris_Stewart_5 @SatoshiLite That’s OK; they’ll lose plenty more if BU’s EC actually kicks in and starts orphaning left and right.
@mikestable @flyosity True, though the math to determine values of rights is beyond my abilities, so I just consider them all important.
@SatoshiLite The free market sorts these things out beautifully.
@AlpacaSW @pwuille @TheBlueMatt @timoncc Yeah, but I would think that you would want to ban peers offering bad blocks regardless.
@pwuille @TheBlueMatt @timoncc Makes me wonder: why didn’t my node ban the last 2 peers sending the bad block? https://t.co/r54YvnpBD0
My node behind https://t.co/HN6b9OKPvS rejected this invalid Bitcoin Unlimited block not once, not twice, but three… https://t.co/NxLi7OA9Au
@SatoshiLite @AaronvanW Not seeing it on other explorers or nodes; I recall the time bc.info falsely displayed a Satoshi tx.
@SatoshiLite @AaronvanW Any independent verification that block 000000000000000000cf208f521de0424677f7a87f2f278a1042f38d159565f5 was real?
@desantis Ammo can failed Faraday cage test. Materials for my next project have arrived. pic.twitter.com/7XYaDJis19
5) The greater the diversity of available means to rebalance channels and keep them open, the greater the robustness of @lightning network.
4) You can think of channel rebalancing as a sort of “liquidity injection†that stabilizes a poorly performing piece of the network.
3) Forced channel closures, depending upon a variety of factors, may range from mildly annoying to nearly catastrophic.
2) As I noted in my @lightning article, channel rebalancing may be one of the greatest engineering challenges. https://t.co/3JfGR2Qjrm
1) Brilliant idea and kind of a big deal for @lightning network; here’s why: https://t.co/ZtKXvcsTVK
@flyosity Eh, the difference is if people think it’s OK to sacrifice some rights vs a more extreme view of protecting all rights.
@flyosity ROFL Democrats want to restrict rights too - just different ones from Republicans.
@seweso @riprowan @drwasho To be clear, you could run any number of implementations such as NBitcoin, bcoin, btcd, libbitcoin, toshi…
@riprowan @seweso @drwasho You’re mixing up two different issues. I’m comparing specific implementation, not arguing meta Bitcoin protocol.
@riprowan @seweso @drwasho B/C everyone uses same rules, chain can reorg but eventually everyone will follow chain with most cumulative PoW.
“Introduction to Bitcoin & Blockchains” - a presentation I gave recently at @NCStateMcKimmon Center. https://t.co/7ScoC2pWdm
@riprowan @seweso @drwasho That’s a meta issue, though - if you don’t agree with the consensus rules, you aren’t running Core.
@riprowan @seweso @drwasho There is no technical reason that guarantees chain convergence. This is a classic “freedom vs safety” argument.
@riprowan @seweso @drwasho With Core, every node will reject excessive blocks and miners get forked off the main chain.
@deadalnix @seweso @drwasho Indeed - I think we can all agree that the market will prevail in the sense that it will choose the rule system.
@riprowan @seweso @drwasho Unfortunately not: miners can either blow past your EB limit or if your AD is huge, fork you off the main chain.
@seweso @drwasho You could make that same claim about any number of consensus rules. Why not create EC for coinbase rewards?
@BitcoinNemesis Holders can run nodes or they can vote with their feet by selling coins.
@seweso @drwasho The balance of power in Bitcoin is too complex to shift it around and claim it’s safe just because… https://t.co/PqKWEOehE8