Author: Claus Ehrenberg 2021-04-07 13:42:01
Published on: 2021-04-07T13:42:01+00:00
A user suggests that Taproot should activate if either miners or users decide for it, and a chain split is the fairest way to resolve the conflict. Rusty Russell discusses the core question of what to do if miners fail to activate and mentions that the Speedy Trial approach avoids unnecessary risk by pretending that miners were not asked. He believes that users should decide, and those such as him and Luke should continue working on a LOT=true branch for future consideration. However, he acknowledges that people want Taproot activated more than the groundwork for future upgrades. There are downsides to LOT=true, including the requirement to drop blocks from apathetic miners and the risk of a chain split if gauging economic majority support goes poorly. Russell suggests that openly creating a contingency plan is not brinkmanship, but rather normal. He thinks that bitcoin users should be the ultimate decider, and offering them all the tools to do so will show that it is not just lip-service. UASF can be prepared along with ST, but ST is designed not to give time to conclude that miners are stalling. Ultimately, everyone is at the whim of the economic majority.
Updated on: 2023-06-14T19:46:35.461995+00:00