mirrors/bitcoin-bips
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/bitcoin/bips.git synced 2025-02-23 15:20:50 +01:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Improvements to Schism hardforks section

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Jorge Timón 2015-11-08 13:19:42 +01:00
parent 82784e6061
commit 011fdce88f
1 changed files with 34 additions and 7 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

41
bip-0099.mediawiki
View file

@ -137,27 +137,49 @@ consider the risk of motivating a schism hardfork before attempting
such a consensus fork. A deployment plan for this case is also
unnecessary.
===Schism[1] hardforks===
===Schism hardforks===
In all of the following examples there's clearly a confrontation that
is being resolved using an intentional consensus fork.
Fundamental disagreements and controversies are part of social
systems, like the one defined as the human participants in the Bitcoin
network. Without judging the motivation of the rule discrepancies or
what rules were in place first, we're definining schism[1] hardforks as
those in which - for whatever reason - users are consiously going to validate 2
different sets of consensus rules. Since they will validate different
rulesets, they will end up following 2 different chains for at least
some time, maybe forever.
Being a schism hardfork, there will likely be 2 chains
coexisting for at least some time, maybe forever. Maybe bitcoin
becomes bitcoinA and bitcoinB. The implications for market
One possible result observed in the past[non_proportional_inflatacoin_fork]
is that one of the chains rapidly disappears, but nothing indicates
that this must always be the case.
While 2 chains cohexist, they can be considered two different
currencies.
We could say that bitcoin becomes bitcoinA and bitcoinB. The implications for market
capitalization are completely unpredictable,
maybe mc(bitcoinA) = mc(bitcoinB) = mc(old_bitcoin),
maybe mc(bitcoinA) + mc(bitcoinB) = mc(old_bitcoin),
maybe mc(bitcoinA) + mc(bitcoinB) = 1000 * mc(old_bitcoin),
maybe mc(bitcoinA) + mc(bitcoinB) = 0,
...
Schism hardforks have been compared to one type of altcoins called
"spinoffs"[spinoffs] that distribute all or part of its initial seigniorage to
bitcoin owners at a given block height.
This is very disruptive and hopefully will never be needed. But if
it's needed the best deployment path is just to activate the rule
changes after certain block height in the future. On the other hand,
it is healthy decentralization-wise that many independent software
projects are ready to deploy a schism hardfork.
In all of the following examples there's clearly a confrontation that
is being resolved using an intentional consensus hardfork.
====ASIC-reset hardfork====
Imagine ASIC production has been consolidated to a single company and
@ -320,6 +342,10 @@ worth of blocks).
[2] https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0050.mediawiki
[non_proportional_inflatacoin_fork] TODO missing link
[spinoffs] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563972.0
[3] https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0009.mediawiki
[4] https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0.11...jtimon:hardfork-timewarp-0.11
@ -332,7 +358,8 @@ https://github.com/freicoin/freicoin/commit/beb2fa54745180d755949470466cbffd1cd6
==Attribution==
Incorporated corrections and suggestions from: Andy Chase, Bryan Bishop, Btcdrak, Gregory Sanders, Luke Dashjr, Marco Falke.
Incorporated corrections and suggestions from: Andy Chase, Bryan Bishop,
Btcdrak, Gavin Andresen, Gregory Sanders, Luke Dashjr, Marco Falke.
==Copyright==