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.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

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.

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.

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

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. ^_^