@sjors @bitcoinmagazine @AaronvanW No problem. My favorite bits were you sounding content choosing North Korea instead of Korea for the nationality of the uninformed user and Aaron's realization that you were making a pretty convincing argument for LOT=true 😂

@sjors @bitcoinmagazine @AaronvanW On the minority chain not moving forward (no new mined blocks) I think it is worth emphasizing that eventually the difficulty adjustment kicks in and it will move forward with any amount of hash power. It isn't stuck with no new blocks in perpetuity.

@michaelfolkson @sjors @bitcoinmagazine @AaronvanW what? Difficulty only adjusts when you hit the retarget boundary; of your not mining blocks that won't ever happen.

@ajtowns @sjors @bitcoinmagazine @AaronvanW I did say "minority" and "any amount of hash power". If it literally has zero hash power (or very close to zero) then yeah in theory it could never mine another block

Reading it back though I could have phrased it better. You'd have a long time to get to the difficulty adjustment but at that point you'd go back to the normal 10 minute Poisson process (with any material amount of hash power) and move forward normally

@michaelfolkson unless of course those people decide to change the PoW. Not something I'm a fan of.

@michaelfolkson "the minority chain not moving forward (no new mined blocks)"

@ajtowns @michaelfolkson @bitcoinmagazine @AaronvanW if enough transaction fees pile up, it increases the incentive for miners, but they'd have to be confident about ever reaching coinbase maturity, and the price at maturity being attractive.

@sjors @michaelfolkson @bitcoinmagazine @AaronvanW You'd need it to be high fee rate transactions as you can only fit so many txs into a block, and you'd need the other chain's mempool to have lower fee txs. And you have to discount all that by the price/odds of those coins being accepted by anyone. But yeah that gets you to blocks being mined, which eventually gets you to a retarget which makes your chain maybe sustainable.

@sjors @michaelfolkson @bitcoinmagazine @AaronvanW if you want to claim both sides of a fork you need to close the channel I think (unless both nodes are aware of both sides of the split and LN gets some protocol to negotiate a replay protected close)

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Bitcoin Mastodon

Bitcoin Maston Instance