Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2021 12:19:41 -0800
Message-Id: <D84DD0C3-60EC-43DF-B250-FF039814331B@voskuil.org>
References: <202103021857.39275.luke@dashjr.org>
In-Reply-To: <202103021857.39275.luke@dashjr.org>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>,
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Michael Folkson <michaelfolkson@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] UASF (LOT=true) kick off meeting - Tuesday March
	2nd 19:00 UTC on ##uasf IRC channel
Precedence: list

I personally don=E2=80=99t like the term 51% attack as applied to censorship=
. A miner is free to mine or not mine any transactions it wants (censor). Th=
e term attack is better reserved for stealing from someone (reclaiming spend=
s using hash power), as it implies a moral distinction.

But 51% attack is the term in common use for a majority censor and using it h=
elps people understand the mechanism of hash power soft fork enforcement. It=
=E2=80=99s not intended as a pejorative.=20

However =E2=80=9Cwithout social support=E2=80=9D is a political term. It con=
fuses the actual behavior to imply the mechanism is somehow not the same bec=
ause there is some ill-defined level of agreement.

e


> On Mar 2, 2021, at 10:58, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.l=
inuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>=20
> =EF=BB=BFOn Tuesday 02 March 2021 18:22:35 Ariel Lorenzo-Luaces via bitcoi=
n-dev wrote:
>> I'm realizing that a clear advantage of LOT=3Dfalse is that it can happen=

>> without the need for a social movement. All that is really needed is the
>> convincing of 95% miners. Apathetic users will never notice any kind of
>> service disruption no matter the success or failure of the activation. Th=
is
>> is obviously why it naturally became the default activation method.
>=20
> No. Miners enforcing rules without the social support is a 51% attack, not=
 a=20
> softfork.
>=20
>> While LOT=3Dtrue, on the other hand, must be able to 51% the blockchain t=
o
>> win the apathetic users. But then the reorgs will not be pretty. Or if it=

>> ever clearly gets over the 51% hurdle then all apathetic users now need t=
o
>> scramble to use the rogue client to be safe from reorgs. Either way it's
>> disruptive.
>=20
> No, LOT=3DTrue doesn't do this. It only happens if miners choose to create=
 an=20
> invalid chain, which they could do at any time with or without a softfork=20=

> involved.
>=20
> Luke
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev