Subnostr

It's implausible that they could do something like this without Bitcoin node runners hyperactively blocking out their entire IP address holdings overnight. There's over 20000 of us now.

The node runners on bitcoin are anything but hyperactive, most are shockingly passive and you can see this in the time it takes nodes to upgrade to things like segwit (months, years, never). Anyway, what is the effect of "blocking out their entire IP address holdings"?

Neither do people rush to accept BIPs let alone PRs.

There is a whole slew of heuristics already used by Bitcoin core p2p code to react to known malicious or erroneous behavior.

The net result is that every node written to recognise some part of this hypothetical large scale attack will already auto blacklist any number of peers not following protocol.

The social response is something else, but 1tb and larger ssds are so cheap now... And you can sync Core in ender 12 hours on 100mbit or faster connections.

Alert me and mine will be back online the next day.

This is second day reminder. I am alerted. No surprise UASF tyvm.

Tomorrow.

None of that would stop Blackrock from creating a fork... you know that right?

You think core devs would agree to it. That's ridiculous.

They represent us far better than politicians.

I'm just gonna call it FUD, and also, idgaf about the usd. 1sat = 1sat

Have fun worrying about the sky falling and basing this on the acorn that fell on your head...

Dude are you thick... they would create a FORK... bitcoin Blackrock edition.

captain ☦️ 2y ago

You have no idea how Bitcoin works

Not sure what you mean. I am very familiar with the transaction script engine, difficulty adjustment algorithm and the p2p protocol, veracks, banscores, persistent peers. I forked the btcd codebase to match an ancient 2014 chain.

And core devs don't control anything. Plenty of other inputs you can see on the issues and the linux.org mailing list.

Bitcoin is a common property so it cannot be changed without very long discussions. Go look at the BIP list, now nearing 300. Much of the new stuff not yet implemented.

captain ☦️ 2y ago

Earlier you implied that core devs need to agree to changes as if they have some kind of veto.

Secretary Janet Yellen 2y ago

Nothing is stopping anyone to create a #Bitcoin fork. It is an open source piece of software.

Correct. Anyone who doesn’t like the rules is free to fork off at any time. 🤝

Fork off being the operative phrase. ^_^

We don’t even need to. Habanero’s premise was that they fork off.

If BR’s nodes have left consensus, then regular nodes will disconnect as part of regular operations.

Brunswick 2y ago

What makes Bitcoin what it is, is any changes to the code or protocol are in the hands of not only the miners, not only in the hands of the node runners, but in the hands of the HODLers themselves. To believe Blackrock's act of forking is going to destroy Bitcoin is to taint the definition of bitcoin itself. Running more nodes than everyone else doesn't change it, the code enforces the protocol. Sure Blackrock could theoretically run 95% of the miners and thereby press a protocol change, but this is still a different chain, different code. Adding retirement-capital to make NGU to a chain with more miners still doesn't change bitcoin, it only swindles everyone's retirement account using the blackrock "bitcoin" chain. Blackrock could convince most people they hold bitcoin on their shitcoin chain, but they won't and then, watch --- out. Blackrock would be the next FTX.

Think of it this way... what if bitcoin cash, when it split, was able to maintain a significantly higher price than BTC for atleast a year post fork. Blackrock has an unimaginable influence on the market, and can hold the ETF holders hostage to their decision of the "legitimate" bitcoin chain. It is a risk to think about; Blackrock in my eyes is a malicious actor.

This note is from another thread and is my current thought on the topic:

The only defense I could see is a robust Bitcoin ETF market, with each ETF offering competing over the traits of transparency, blockchain verify-ability, and ease of redemption. If only the Blackrock ETF gets approved I think shenanigans are about to go down

Brunswick 2y ago

Agreed, however plebs aren't the only ones that would be screaming from the rooftops that Blackrock's chain is a shitcoin. With bitcoin being as transparent as it needs to be, I don't think any organization could pull it off.

Don't underestimate your enemy, and definitely not one with a $12.6 trillion war chest.

Brunswick 2y ago

npub1lxktpvp5cnq3wl5ctu2x88e30mc0ahh8v47qvzc5dmneqqjrzlkqpm5xlc ? 🤣

https://bitnodes.io/nodes/all/

Ahahahaha!! Perfect!

Secretary Janet Yellen 2y ago

*almost 50k of #Bitcoin nodes

RealJohnDoe 2y ago

No one knows how many of us there really are. I've been #Tor #only for years. We would do many things. They would #bleed dry. There are already many #failed #forks..😆😂🤣🤭🧡👑

Secretary Janet Yellen 2y ago

Roger also thought he's loaded enough to go against the users/nodes. The miners as well as many exchanges, faketoshi & his pedo billionaire friend joined him too. The majority of users/nodes won. If BR manages to convince the majority of #Bitcoin users, the fork will become Bitcoin. The question is, how many Bitcoin forks managed to do that? Zero.

Note, Bitcoin is fungible - interchangeable. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fungible

RamenCoffee 2y ago

one thing you're missing in your analysis is that 98% of the forked supply is getting dumped for more corn.

you haven't given a good rationale as to why they would win a price war.

also, say they do everything you say they do, we're still here, richer. it would be like they had never launched an etf.... so yeah bitcoin wouldn't disappear.

Also, if this would fly, this would create a massive opening for shitcoins to have their own etfs. so the SEC mught frown upon the practice : imagine I want to launch an eth ETF. i launch a Bitcoin one instead, and then fork to be compatible with ETH.

not saying you're wrong, but you need to adress those points.

nostr:nevent1qqsghpe77atwn9kw68jnx9gutkge8xnwdpn8mpra3m9cd55yw2q8npcpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfdupzqcnvt2adeun7rzn45q6hcce8w9wjvv9tuxg28uaxv2q82jtgqjdeqvzqqqqqqyzdgsrz

The bitcoin "investors" would more than likely not immediately dump the bitcoin BR coin. They would wait it out to see who wins the price war, and probably keep both for a significant time frame. Sure a small subset of active bitcoin advocates and users would dump it, but I assume Blackrock would run significant interference to stop sell orders: spamming onchain, media propaganda, exchange outages, market spoofing, ect.

Also, thanks for adding the joke about the SEC at the end.

BTCAccountant 2y ago

This chain is relevant

Let’s grant all your premises. To wit:

1. BR forks off.

2. BR spins up Sybil network.

3. BR manipulates BR coin price up.

4. BR moon attracts investors.

My rebuttal is “so what?”

There are already manipulated asset classes with higher market cap than #Bitcoin (e.g. XAU). What difference does it make if there’s another?

Their is no second best. -Saylor The so what, is that the market tends to agree on the best *single* form of money. This is seen throughout history and the benefits are efficiency and convenience when transacting.