I don't mean to diss OP here, but free market analogies have often misguided people. Sometimes you need good engineering. It really is what led to Bitcoin Cash.
But that doesn't mean blindly trusting engineers. You should find out if they really know what they're doing. How to find out? That's a hard problem, i.e. they can't all get on a person phone call with you, some have an abrasive communication style, sometimes a problem seems very simple but take a lot of curriculum knowledge to grok. You can't just trust them either when they say "it's complicated", because that what charlatans would say too.
nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpp59a0hkv5ecm45nrckvmu7pnk0sukssvly33u3wwzquy4v037hcqy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qgewaehxw309ahx7um5wgh8xurjdamx7mmnwshxump0qqstac4p6x0qethuhec2p9a62ln0x0d6mkwgnq23v48gsvwxx3s02asx75yle
Login to reply
Replies (4)
Bitcoin Cash was a great gift to Bitcoin. It gathered evidence to sustain that their hypothesis doesn't work. That is important evidence to have.
Massive collatoral damage. The hypothesis could have proven with a simple alt coin, rather than years of vicious attack on Bitcoin Core.
True, but unavoidable.
It will happen over and over again. Some people just need to see things play out to believe.
Reasoning is good. But hard evidence is king.
Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised at a (spectacularly failing) UASF to make the Knots OP_RETURN limit and other filters consensus.