|
|
|
|
|
by px43
1793 days ago
|
|
It's not artistry, it's overly complex hackery to satiate some weird technological obsession. Even with a soft fork, everyone still needs to update their nodes to maintain consensus. BIP100 signalling would have fixed everything and avoided so much drama. |
|
Also known as... backwards compatibility.
>Even with a soft fork, everyone still needs to update their nodes to maintain consensus
Not really. If you decide to not upgrade your node you're not going to get kicked off the network. Your node won't be enforcing the new rules (which is bad), but you're probably not going to lose money due to herd immunity and/or game theory. Specifically, your client will blindly accept taproot transactions (without checking for them) if they make it into a block. An evil miner could possibly use this to send you fraudulent transfers, however:
1. you need to somehow amass the hashpower necessary to generate such a block. this is non-trivial given the network difficulty
2. the block would be considered invalid by the rest of the network, so you'll be forfeiting the regular block reward of ~6.25 BTC
3. other miners won't build on top of this block, so it will take forever to get to 6 confirms
4. in addition to the above, your fork will get overtaken by the legitimate chain and will be ignored
5. if it turns out that your victim did upgrade his wallet software, you just spent a bunch of resources for nothing.