Good morning Ben,
I am not Mark, and I am nowhere near being a true Core developer yet, but I
would like to point out that even under a 51% attack, there is a practical
limit to the number of blocks that can be orphaned. It would still take years
to rewrite history from the Genesis block, for instance.
What little data we have (BT1 / BT2 price ratio on BitFinex) suggests that
tokens solely on the 2X chain will not be valued as highly as tokens solely on
the Core chain. As miners generate tokens that are only for a specific chain,
they will have higher incentive to gain tokens on the Core chain rather than
the 2X chain.
As is commonly said, hodling is free, whereas mining is not. Hodlers have much
greater power in hardfork situations than miners have: simply by selling their
tokens on the 2X chain and not in the Core chain, hodlers can impose economic
disincentives for mining of the 2X chain.
Miners can switch to BCH, but that is valued even less than BT2 tokens are, and
thus even less attractive to mine on.
We should also pay attention, that BCH changed its difficulty algorithm, and it
is often considered to be to its detriment due to sudden hashpower oscillations
on that chain. We should be wary of difficulty algorithm changes, as it is the
difficulty which determines the security of the chain.
--
If we attempt to deploy a difficulty change, that is a hardfork, and hodlers
will be divided on this situation. Some will sell the tokens on the
difficulty-change hardfork, some will sell the tokens on the
non-difficulty-change hardfork. Thus the economic punishment for mining the 2X
chain will be diluted due to the introduction of the difficulty-change
hardfork, due to splitting of the hodler base that passes judgment over
development.
Thus, strategy-wise, it is better to not hardfork (whether difficulty
adjustment, PoW change, or so on) in response to a contentious hardfork, as
hodlers can remain united against or for the contentious hardfork. Instead, it
is better to let the market decide, which automatically imposes economic
sanctions on miners who choose against the market's decision. Thus, it is
better to simply let 2X die under the hands of our benevolent hodlers.
Later, when it is obvious which fate is sealed, we can reconsider such changes
(difficulty adjustment, PoW change, block size) when things are calmer.
However, such changes cannot be safely done in response to a contentious
hardfork.
--
If indeed the Core chain is eradicated, then Bitcoin indeed has failed and I
would very much rather sell my hodlings and find some other means to amuse
myself.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
