Author: Eric Voskuil 2017-06-16 03:09:33
Published on: 2017-06-16T03:09:33+00:00
The concept of signaling in the context of Bitcoin is only an expression of intent to participate, not actual participation. Although some web wallets and APIs may signal based on their ownership of the major fraction of value, potential splitters cannot safely rely on these signals. The wallets have a voice because they participate, but signaling is not actual participation. User activated soft forks are not followed by unmodified nodes, which exhibit the categorical behavior of hard forks. In other words, to the extent that the economy has control, it is only over the ability to hard fork (split the chain). Erik Aronesty had proposed that "UTXO bits" can be used to allow coordinated user participation activation thresholds akin to other hashpower thresholds. This mechanism or a similar one would be a reasonable way for users to coordinate changes independently of miners and with very high consensus levels. There is exactly one way to express one's opinion on consensus at the protocol level - participation. The method is neither flawed nor inequitable in the context of Bitcoin. The only problem is that people are not satisfied with having a voice limited to their participation. People are used to political systems in which they vote using their existence as power, not their participation, and they expect some subset of existing human bodies to control all others.Bitcoin exists in defiance of political models. It is a market, not a state. The only choice you have is to participate or leave. If you are satisfied with others participating in your stead, you have left the consensus - you have no say. Measuring meatspace consensus is pretty tricky if not completely impossible, especially given the fact that the vast majority of Bitcoin users do not voice any opinions on the matter of consensus rules. Most attempts at measuring user consensus would probably be best described as signaling rather than voting given that the act of doing so has no actual power to affect consensus. Every user who runs a fully validating node is free to enforce the rules with which they agree regardless of what rules other entities are enforcing.
Updated on: 2023-06-12T02:31:46.565399+00:00