<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2014-04-23&#xA;📝 Original message:&gt;&#xA;&gt; No. Bitcoin should work if miners are merely individually rational, i.e.&#xA;&gt; they try to maximize their pay-offs without colluding with others.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&#xA;And it still would. Non-collusive miners cast votes based on the outcome of&#xA;their own attempts to double spend. If enough agree then they all agree&#xA;that the vote is binding.&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&gt; I guess word &#34;honest&#34; might have different meanings, that can be a source&#xA;&gt; of confusing.&#xA;&gt; 1. Honest -- not trying to destroy bitcoin&#xA;&gt; 2. Honest -- following rules which are not required by the protocol&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&#xA;I&#39;m using it in the same sense Satoshi used it. Honest miners work to&#xA;prevent double spends. That&#39;s the entire justification for their existence.&#xA;Miners that are deliberately trying to double spend are worse than useless.&#xA;-------------- next part --------------&#xA;An HTML attachment was scrubbed...&#xA;URL: &lt;http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140423/d4fe9367/attachment.html&gt;</html></oembed>