Author: eric at voskuil.org 2021-06-30 09:17:08
Published on: 2021-06-30T09:17:08+00:00
In a recent email exchange, Eric Voskuil responded to several questions related to Bitcoin's consensus rules and mining. He explained that any two people on different rules imply a chain split and that there is no actual concept of "the rules," just one set of rules or another. When asked why miners would decide to mine a chain that nobody wants to use, Voskuil stated that he did not know and that economics does not presume to know either. He also commented on the relevance of game theory to Bitcoin, noting that he has seen no actual demonstration of its applicability to Bitcoin.Regarding soft fork signaling, Voskuil explained that a miner can still mine whatever they want even after signaling readiness for a soft fork. However, each miner seeing the signals of others, unless they are coordinating, would presumably assume that others will enforce. Voskuil also noted that a node (software) does not enforce anything; merchants enforce consensus rules when they reject trading for something that they don't consider money, and miners censor, which is inconsequential unless enforced. When asked if soft fork signaling is the same as voting, Voskuil replied that it doesn't need a label apart from signaling and that what people consider it is inconsequential. Finally, Voskuil clarified that miners mine a chain, whichever one they want, and earn the block reward. Signaling is not voting, although many people consider it so, including some mining pools and exchanges.
Updated on: 2023-06-14T23:43:33.136244+00:00