Published on: 2016-10-28T15:28:35+00:00
The email thread discussing soft forks in Bitcoin Core reveals a misconception that soft forks do not require users to upgrade software. However, this is not entirely accurate, as miners and users who wish to utilize old rules are no longer able to do so under tightened rules implemented through soft forks. This can lead to network splits and the creation of two separate coins. The thread mentions the BIP 66 hard fork, which occurred due to greedy miners engaging in SPV mining rather than "sloppy deployment" by developers. The upcoming Segregated Witness (SegWit) soft fork is also discussed, raising questions about whether non-SegWit transactions will still validate blocks and whether miners mining non-SegWit blocks will be disregarded. One proposal suggests removing previously "soft forked" rules for non-SegWit transactions and requiring them only for SegWit transactions, making SegWit optional. However, this would necessitate a hard fork and result in functionality loss and various bug fixes. Amidst the conversation, Andrew proposes creating a new client called Bitcoin Authentic if his proposal does not gain traction. Other participants in the thread show little interest in this idea. Overall, the discussion highlights the need for clarity regarding the impact of soft forks on software upgrades, concerns about the upcoming SegWit soft fork, and proposals for alternative approaches to implementing new features.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T19:11:41.423977+00:00