Nostr Web Client

Pretty much all the nodes decided they weren't valid. If I remember correctly they tried to spend from an address that didn't have any BTC because they messed up their order of operations. At that point the only way to receive the block reward is to fork the chain, or reorder the transactions before submitting a block again.

Again, you keep coming back to a single point of failure. This is why the book "block size wars" was written. This has already been done with BCH and BSV.

They have nodes that decide something else IS a valid block. At that point you become a whole new network.

But the bootstrapped plebs that ran BTC nodes in those early days kept it alive by not altering their consensus rules. Even though all the money in the world tried to shift to bigger blocks.

Leathermint 1y ago

But at which point does this transaction become truly invalid?

1/4 of nodes

1/2 of nodes

3/4 of nodes

When is it clear that a transaction is invalid? Is it really a number of nodes or is it the consequences you're faced with when certain nodes do not recognized your transaction?

I Don't think what I'm talking about as to do with a point of failure. I don't see recognizing a transaction as valid or not to be a failure or not of Bitcoin.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Leathermint 1y ago

Scratch last answer. I think I'm getting lost in a few things.

I do understand that a node validating a transaction following different rules = fork

Leathermint 1y ago

I guess my current line of questioning is more about the impact that a node who simply record other transactions following the current rules would have if it was to change it's rules.

Imo, ot would have 0 impact.

Leathermint 1y ago

They wouldn't serve as a 'force' to push the new fork as it as no economic power.

Then, if I believe this, I must also believe that a node who simply record valid transaction do not have much power in pushing the current original Bitcoin as the real Bitcoin.

Tho calling it useless might be wrong since they serve as decentralization of the ledger.

Leathermint 1y ago

Essentially I might be coming to the understanding that

Economic node = Strong network

Nodes = Decentralization network

Leathermint 1y ago

I don't know tho. Just thinking out loud 😄

Kevin 1y ago

Actually I really enjoyed that full line of thinking!

I agree with you on your train of thought.

It's not that the one node has a ton of power individually. It's the fact that it stops other individuals from trying to push whatever agenda they want.

You're holding the status quo by running the node. Which if #Bitcoin fails decentralization, let's face it, #Bitcoin fails all together. It's incredibly valuable to have more nodes although you can't see the benefit except abstractly.