well, it's not "rolling back the chain" , so there's that, at least.
We all have to learn about Bitcoin the hard way and recently Paxos F'd around and found out when they overpaid $500,000 in fees on Sept. 10
They are a well-known stablecoin issuer and should know better but they made a mistake, but now they're asking miners to save them and begging F2Pools to give the money back.
We've all overpaid for transactions before, obviously not to this extent, many have also F'd up transactions and no one came to save the plebs that did, so why do companies get special treatment?
If the pool does hand back the funds to me it just shows mining pools have way too much say in the network and if I was a miner I'd be pointing my hash somewhere else if im losing a possible share in a 20 BTC windfall
Will be interesting to see what the outcome will be, but I thought we don't get do-overs in #Bitcoin, doesn't this set a dangerous precedent?
https://cointelegraph.com/news/paxos-confirms-responsible-for-500k-mistaken-bitcoin-transaction
Discussion
It's an interesting question. There was talk about splitting it 50 / 50. Also proves that miners are not escrow servcies.
Yeah I mean if all the miners in the pool are okay with missing out on their share of 20 BTC by all means, but the transaction went through as part of the consensus, yes you made an oopsie, but Bitcoin don't care, you clicked broadcast
A part of me kinda wants to see what miners do if the pool makes the decision to hand over a pay day like that, do they all bolt to another pool and it kills F2 or do miners just act as slaves to whatever the pool decides, doesn't sound very decentralised to me, surely there are consequences to every decision
Technically refund if it will happen, will be included in new block as a new transaction. Miners got their reward, therefore, the future of their income is determined by themselves, and this process does not concern consensus and network security, imo.