MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAH6h1LuemHi1Z8REhZRywghaLjAzy1e1LeHxVdA7iBifGnLnJA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160510185728.GA1149@fedora-21-dvm>
	<CAH6h1Ls_Dh_oBo-fUMoBtwCQ=U3XgBLhbuHvH+ra78bjHYNyXQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABeL=0iSvOTqQ-JRuhQfc7spKaXi1eBMMm0D-ahVm3GwztQQ_w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160511103601.GC2439@banane.informatik.uni-ulm.de>
	<CABeL=0ih+BB+AKO6uJRCDGZoVo5is4+GBUfQAJkE48Pd_4vzOQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH6h1LuemHi1Z8REhZRywghaLjAzy1e1LeHxVdA7iBifGnLnJA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 13:05:51 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDqOs=Qj6rjiG1-EWeaVO2b-maZoAzNj1PsTdHGvAabYUA@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Timo Hanke <timo.hanke@web.de>,
	Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11433b8e30c8a70532a32407
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Making AsicBoost irrelevant
Precedence: list

--001a11433b8e30c8a70532a32407
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On May 12, 2016 00:43, "Timo Hanke via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> This is what I meant. If existing hardware gets forked-out it will
inevitably lead to the creation of an altcoin. Simply because the hardware
exists and can't be used for anything else both chains will survive. I was
only comparing the situation to a contentious hardfork that does not fork
out any hardware. If the latter one is suspected to lead to the permanent
existence of two chains then a hardfork that forks out hardware is even
more likely to do so (I claim it's guaranteed).

You are wrong. Whether 2 chains survive in parallel or not depends SOLELY
in whether both chains maintain demand (aka users).
Anyway, this is a discussion I had with Gavin and Rusty on bitcoin-discuss
already. I suggest we move this particular point there since it is more
philosophical than technical.

--001a11433b8e30c8a70532a32407
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr"><br>
On May 12, 2016 00:43, &quot;Timo Hanke via bitcoin-dev&quot; &lt;<a href=
=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfo=
undation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; This is what I meant. If existing hardware gets forked-out it will ine=
vitably lead to the creation of an altcoin. Simply because the hardware exi=
sts and can&#39;t be used for anything else both chains will survive. I was=
 only comparing the situation to a contentious hardfork that does not fork =
out any hardware. If the latter one is suspected to lead to the permanent e=
xistence of two chains then a hardfork that forks out hardware is even more=
 likely to do so (I claim it&#39;s guaranteed).</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">You are wrong. Whether 2 chains survive in parallel or not d=
epends SOLELY in whether both chains maintain demand (aka users).<br>
Anyway, this is a discussion I had with Gavin and Rusty on bitcoin-discuss =
already. I suggest we move this particular point there since it is more phi=
losophical than technical.</p>

--001a11433b8e30c8a70532a32407--