|
|
|
|
|
|
by joosters
1894 days ago
|
|
|
I mean in terms of bugs, rather than a 'rogue' client, i.e. not a deliberate attempt to cause a chain divergence. If a 'broken' transaction gets accepted by a buggy client, and that buggy client has a majority of hash power, then that transaction is, by definition, not actually broken at all and everyone will be forced to accept it (because it will take too long to write a bug fix and re-write the blockchain history) |
|
|