Author: Gavin Andresen 2016-02-07 17:09:46
Published on: 2016-02-07T17:09:46+00:00
The feedback request for a specific BIP has turned into a general debate about the merits of soft-forks versus hard-forks. Gavin Andresen has addressed concerns regarding what would happen if a significant fraction of hash power sticks with the 1mb branch of the chain. He stated that proof of work cannot be spoofed and if there is very little hashpower mining a minority chain, confirmations on that chain take orders of magnitude longer. Andresen also wrote about why the incentives are extremely strong for only the stronger branch to survive. All of the security concerns he has seen flow from an assumption that significant hashpower continues on the weaker branch. The BIP under discussion assumes that analysis is correct. Gavin Andresen proposes the creation of a patch for Core that accepted a more proof-of-work chain with larger blocks but refused to mine larger blocks. This would require very little testing and may be the best compromise until a permanent solution is agreed upon that eliminates contentious limits.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T03:46:18.436145+00:00