path: root/27/ed293bc32646582899325205b4f48b11359190

Return-Path: <andrewlecody@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 663B674
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sun, 16 Aug 2015 23:22:56 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-oi0-f49.google.com (mail-oi0-f49.google.com
	[209.85.218.49])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91A7C159
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sun, 16 Aug 2015 23:22:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by oiew67 with SMTP id w67so52144766oie.2
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sun, 16 Aug 2015 16:22:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
	:content-type; bh=dGoPGqOMBYtwv4We0vlRP2iBUd/AuCEQn+x0WHpAOAY=;
	b=eg9slKKaNVXrlJ1pfXMDY7UqUhdqxLJxM0mnQ2GsXJ6h58o1uzdq9cTacP3rgnDfxM
	9R1I/CNzvVOt3KzB+ZrjofnEA0tyqS4I0CAdsfOlHmGapV9VZtjU63WZoUQjqtSF1nKE
	kQO2ieoS7kTkWQ1WyMBvDMdUJJGCFinU2HMIusnSZrp9xE0+UU2HTjB4eYEQP4KOVEJ8
	NQXLexO/+Z4e5aYqmNlym3T4DfTBF2hko8VM9k1tyneqtVxryXe9HVLBOOUmmPVQdp84
	HdNIdESN1WQCLCVXt2lNGD/3fYvBT2GWosLARPC7NF1htD0Nge5PhjvHMj6nnrqS/wIS
	Kewg==
X-Received: by 10.202.226.17 with SMTP id z17mr15614775oig.16.1439767374946;
	Sun, 16 Aug 2015 16:22:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CADWuND3EfO6YO3g4H09_mWhrHC4PX4SZpTTuETiX2PyCxSRCsQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<55D1167B.1060107@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <55D1167B.1060107@gmail.com>
From: Andrew LeCody <andrewlecody@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2015 23:22:45 +0000
Message-ID: <CAEX2NSfaPv0g07hfT31voGWX05Z6uaBsZOjhMkOwBr4mdHbPQw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Cameron Garnham <da2ce7@gmail.com>, bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1141b454f16a64051d75f63c
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
	autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin XT 0.11A
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2015 23:22:56 -0000

--001a1141b454f16a64051d75f63c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Cam, your scenario makes no sense.

> 1. Spoil the ballot. Have Bitcoin Core propagate the Bitcoin XT version
string.
> 2. Encourage all miners to false vote for the Bitcoin XT fork.

This would obliterate any confidence in Bitcoin Core. I seriously doubt
anyone would actually be ok with a pull request implementing this.

> 3. Setup good Atomic Swap markets.

Who would bother writing this code, let alone trading on these markets?

> 4. Setup a fork of Bitcoin XT that allows people to easily make a
transaction only on the XT fork (while leaving the original BTC coins
untouched).

I doubt this is even possible.

On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 6:02 PM Cameron Garnham via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> I think that it is important to note that Bitcoin XT faces a natural
> uphill battle.
>
> Since it is possible to setup atomic inter-fork coin trades. I do not
> see how Bitcoin XT could possibly win if Satoshi decides to sell 10000
> XTBTC for BTC everyday for the first 100 days after the fork.
>
> In many ways Satoshi gets to decide the winning fork just by his huge
> economic investment in Bitcoin.
>
>
> Here is some simple game-theory for non-consensus forks:
>
> 1. Spoil the ballot. Have Bitcoin Core propagate the Bitcoin XT version
> string.
>
> 2. Encourage all miners to false vote for the Bitcoin XT fork.
>
> - Now people have no-idea what % of the economy Bitcoin XT holds. -
> Making it impossible for people to put economic faith behind Bitcoin XT.
>
> 3. Setup good Atomic Swap markets.
>
> 4. Setup a fork of Bitcoin XT that allows people to easily make a
> transaction only on the XT fork (while leaving the original BTC coins
> untouched).
>
>
> This means that the Bitcoin XT fork will be born per-mature. Probably
> with only a small % of hashing power behind it (contrary to the almost
> 100% that falsely claim to support it). It will be embarrassing that for
> the goal of larger blocks, XT instead has blocks (before re-adjustment)
> every 2h.
>
>
> The price for XTBTC coins will plummet, Satoshi progressively dumping
> his 1M stash over a year or so will make sure that it doesn't recover
> either.
>
>
> I cannot see how Bitcoin XT is but-not in a extremely weak position from
> game theory.
>
> I'm sure smarter people than I could come up with even more ways to
> disrupt non-consensus forks.
>
> Cam.
>
>
>
> On 16/8/2015 6:39 AM, muyuubyou via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > I posted this to /r/BitcoinMarkets but I thought I might post it here a=
s
> > well.
> >
> > ---
> > Currently 0 mined blocks have voted for XT.
> >
> > If it ever gets close to even 50%, many things can happen that would
> > reshape the game completely.
> >
> > For instance:
> >
> > - Core could start boycotting XT by not relying to them and/or not
> relying
> > from them.
> >
> > - Core could appropriate the version string of XT, making it impossible
> to
> > know how much they are progressing and a losing bet to actually execute
> the
> > fork.
> >
> > This kind of node war if the factions were sizeable would make it very
> > risky to transact at all - balances in new addresses could end up
> > vanishing. Usability of the system would plummet.
> >
> > Note that any disagreement between the network and the biggest economic
> > actors - mainly the exchanges at this point, "wallet services" maybe -
> > would mean BTC plummets. Hard. And so would confidence.
> >
> > It's a risky game to play.
> > ---
> >
> > PS: I consider this attempt at takeover about as foul as it gets. The
> > equivalent of repeating a referendum until a yes is obtained: the
> > reasonable reaction to this is actively blocking said "referendum". The=
re
> > was a fair play alternative which is voting through coinbase scriptSig
> like
> > plain 8MBers are doing, or like BIP 100 proposes for dynamic adjustment=
.
> > Once a majority is obtained in this way, devs have to react or if they
> > don't then this sort of foul play would be justified. But this wasn't t=
he
> > case.
> >
> > -----
> > =E7=82=BA=E3=81=9B=E3=81=B0=E6=88=90=E3=82=8B
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
> > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>

--001a1141b454f16a64051d75f63c
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Cam, your scenario makes no sense.<div><br></div><div>&gt;=
=C2=A01. Spoil the ballot. Have Bitcoin Core propagate the Bitcoin XT versi=
on</div><div>string.</div><div><span style=3D"line-height:1.5;font-size:13.=
1999998092651px">&gt; 2. Encourage all miners to false vote for the Bitcoin=
 XT fork.</span><br></div><div><span style=3D"line-height:1.5;font-size:13.=
1999998092651px"><br></span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:13.19999980=
92651px;line-height:1.5">This would obliterate any confidence in Bitcoin Co=
re. I seriously doubt anyone would actually be ok with a pull request=C2=A0=
</span>implementing<span style=3D"font-size:13.1999998092651px;line-height:=
1.5">=C2=A0this.</span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:13.1999998092651=
px;line-height:1.5"><br></span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:13.19999=
98092651px;line-height:19.7999992370605px">&gt; 3. Setup good Atomic Swap m=
arkets.</span><br style=3D"font-size:13.1999998092651px;line-height:19.7999=
992370605px"></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:13.1999998092651px;line-he=
ight:19.7999992370605px"><br></span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:13.=
1999998092651px;line-height:19.7999992370605px">Who would bother writing th=
is code, let alone trading on these markets?</span></div><div><span style=
=3D"font-size:13.1999998092651px;line-height:19.7999992370605px"><br></span=
></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:13.1999998092651px;line-height:19.7999=
992370605px">&gt; 4. Setup a fork of Bitcoin XT that allows people to easil=
y make a</span></div><span style=3D"font-size:13.1999998092651px;line-heigh=
t:19.7999992370605px">transaction only on the XT fork (while leaving the or=
iginal BTC coins</span><br style=3D"font-size:13.1999998092651px;line-heigh=
t:19.7999992370605px"><span style=3D"font-size:13.1999998092651px;line-heig=
ht:19.7999992370605px">untouched).</span><div><span style=3D"font-size:13.1=
999998092651px;line-height:19.7999992370605px"><br></span></div><div><span =
style=3D"font-size:13.1999998092651px;line-height:19.7999992370605px">I dou=
bt this is even possible.</span></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
<div dir=3D"ltr">On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 6:02 PM Cameron Garnham via bitcoi=
n-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-=
dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"=
gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-=
left:1ex">I think that it is important to note that Bitcoin XT faces a natu=
ral<br>
uphill battle.<br>
<br>
Since it is possible to setup atomic inter-fork coin trades. I do not<br>
see how Bitcoin XT could possibly win if Satoshi decides to sell 10000<br>
XTBTC for BTC everyday for the first 100 days after the fork.<br>
<br>
In many ways Satoshi gets to decide the winning fork just by his huge<br>
economic investment in Bitcoin.<br>
<br>
<br>
Here is some simple game-theory for non-consensus forks:<br>
<br>
1. Spoil the ballot. Have Bitcoin Core propagate the Bitcoin XT version<br>
string.<br>
<br>
2. Encourage all miners to false vote for the Bitcoin XT fork.<br>
<br>
- Now people have no-idea what % of the economy Bitcoin XT holds. -<br>
Making it impossible for people to put economic faith behind Bitcoin XT.<br=
>
<br>
3. Setup good Atomic Swap markets.<br>
<br>
4. Setup a fork of Bitcoin XT that allows people to easily make a<br>
transaction only on the XT fork (while leaving the original BTC coins<br>
untouched).<br>
<br>
<br>
This means that the Bitcoin XT fork will be born per-mature. Probably<br>
with only a small % of hashing power behind it (contrary to the almost<br>
100% that falsely claim to support it). It will be embarrassing that for<br=
>
the goal of larger blocks, XT instead has blocks (before re-adjustment)<br>
every 2h.<br>
<br>
<br>
The price for XTBTC coins will plummet, Satoshi progressively dumping<br>
his 1M stash over a year or so will make sure that it doesn&#39;t recover<b=
r>
either.<br>
<br>
<br>
I cannot see how Bitcoin XT is but-not in a extremely weak position from<br=
>
game theory.<br>
<br>
I&#39;m sure smarter people than I could come up with even more ways to<br>
disrupt non-consensus forks.<br>
<br>
Cam.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 16/8/2015 6:39 AM, muyuubyou via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br>
&gt; I posted this to /r/BitcoinMarkets but I thought I might post it here =
as<br>
&gt; well.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; ---<br>
&gt; Currently 0 mined blocks have voted for XT.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; If it ever gets close to even 50%, many things can happen that would<b=
r>
&gt; reshape the game completely.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; For instance:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; - Core could start boycotting XT by not relying to them and/or not rel=
ying<br>
&gt; from them.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; - Core could appropriate the version string of XT, making it impossibl=
e to<br>
&gt; know how much they are progressing and a losing bet to actually execut=
e the<br>
&gt; fork.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; This kind of node war if the factions were sizeable would make it very=
<br>
&gt; risky to transact at all - balances in new addresses could end up<br>
&gt; vanishing. Usability of the system would plummet.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Note that any disagreement between the network and the biggest economi=
c<br>
&gt; actors - mainly the exchanges at this point, &quot;wallet services&quo=
t; maybe -<br>
&gt; would mean BTC plummets. Hard. And so would confidence.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; It&#39;s a risky game to play.<br>
&gt; ---<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; PS: I consider this attempt at takeover about as foul as it gets. The<=
br>
&gt; equivalent of repeating a referendum until a yes is obtained: the<br>
&gt; reasonable reaction to this is actively blocking said &quot;referendum=
&quot;. There<br>
&gt; was a fair play alternative which is voting through coinbase scriptSig=
 like<br>
&gt; plain 8MBers are doing, or like BIP 100 proposes for dynamic adjustmen=
t.<br>
&gt; Once a majority is obtained in this way, devs have to react or if they=
<br>
&gt; don&#39;t then this sort of foul play would be justified. But this was=
n&#39;t the<br>
&gt; case.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; -----<br>
&gt; =E7=82=BA=E3=81=9B=E3=81=B0=E6=88=90=E3=82=8B<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; _______________________________________________<br>
&gt; bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
&gt; <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_bl=
ank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
&gt; <a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-=
dev" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
&gt;<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>

--001a1141b454f16a64051d75f63c--