Nostr'a Katılın
2023-06-07 17:41:28 UTC
in reply to

npub17t…4qgyd on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2015-09-28 📝 Original message:> > The rationale for soft ...

📅 Original date posted:2015-09-28
📝 Original message:>
> The rationale for soft vs hard-forks is well known, so I wont go over them.
>

The rationale of "backwards compatibility" is well known, yet wrong. I've
gone over the arguments here and explained why the concept makes no sense:

https://medium.com/@octskyward/on-consensus-and-forks-c6a050c792e7

Eric - no, it's not sophisticated humour. I've been objecting to soft forks
since this idea first appeared.

There is no consensus. Now pick. Lose the requirement that everyone agree
for consensus changes, and tell people you've done it. Change the spec. Or
do nothing.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150928/5dae3282/attachment.html>;