Author: Chris Belcher 2021-03-03 20:48:17
Published on: 2021-03-03T20:48:17+00:00
The debate about the activation of Taproot continues in the Bitcoin community. A recent discussion on Bitcoin-dev mailing list was centered around implementing BIP8, which allows users to activate a soft fork without any miner signaling while keeping the option to abort if not enough miners signal for it. The author of the post argues that the problem with BIP8 is that it creates an incentive for social media drama to promote brinksmanship. However, they also argue against relying on miners to protect users, as shown in their example of a hypothetical flag-day UASF where transactions are only confirmed if they pay a minimum of 1000 sat/vbyte in miner fee. In such cases, the ability to do a counter-UASF is what actually protects users, and miner protection is nothing to count on.The author also argues that flag day activation, which can prevent brinksmanship, can be a legitimate opposition to a change, but it may not always be a good thing since it could force people to go along with something they don't necessarily agree with. While agreeing with the efficiency of this method, the author suggests making all controversial stuff settings that can be changed by RPC command or command-line flag instead of hard-coding them and requiring dissenters to fork away.
Updated on: 2023-06-14T18:59:01.135431+00:00