{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2014-04-23\n📝 Original message:On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Justus Ranvier \u003cjustusranvier at gmail.com\u003ewrote:\n\n\u003e If enough miners don't like a block that has been mined, they can all\n\u003e work to orphan it without any change to the protocol whatsoever.\n\u003e\n\nAs was already pointed out, yes. However this requires them to immediate\nestablish a majority consensus and be absolutely sure it really is the\nmajority. You suggest an out of band mechanism for that, but why is this\nbetter than using the actual consensus mechanism you're trying to measure?\n\n\n\u003e Once you've changed the network such that it is no longer a machine\n\u003e that faithfully processes scripts\n\n\nBitcoin imposes far more rules than just execution of the scripting\nlanguage, many of which are entirely arbitrary and the result of\n(controversial) human judgement, like the inflation schedule. You can't\nclaim Bitcoin implements only some kind of natural law.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140423/addd0c4f/attachment.html\u003e"}