From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr•org>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org,
Andy Chase <theandychase@gmail•com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP/Draft] BIP Acceptance Process
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 21:01:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201509042101.11839.luke@dashjr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAxp-m_EmMbVBqQK9ijoe+n0dAs726TaBX5m1Wgzsv-m1KHdfQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Friday, September 04, 2015 8:13:18 PM Andy Chase via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Who makes high-level Bitcoin decisions? Miners, client devs, merchants, or
> users? Let's set up a system where everyone has a say and clear acceptance
> can be reached.
For hardforks (removing consensus rules), economic consensus: people who
accept payment in bitcoins weighted by their actual volume of such payments.
A supermajority subset may arguably be sufficient for some hardforks (which
don't violate Bitcoin's social contract) since they can effectively compel
the remaining economy to comply.
For softforks (adding consensus rules), a majority of miners: they can "51%
attack" miners who don't go along with it.
Anything else does not necessarily need universal agreement, so are
completely up to the whim of individual software projects. If someone doesn't
like a decision in Core (for example), they can safely fork the code. If any
significant amount of people use their fork, then the BIP is accepted whether
or not Core later adopts it.
Note this "system" is really describing a lack of a system - that is, what
naturally must happen for changes to occur. Softforks have a relatively
mature technical method for measuring support and deploying (which I believe
someone else is already working on a BIP describing), but the same thing is
impractical for hardforks. Some formal way to measure actual economic
acceptance seems like a good idea to study, but it needs to be reasonably
accurate so as to not change the outcome from its natural/necessary result.
Luke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-04 21:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-04 0:30 Andy Chase
2015-09-04 0:41 ` Luke Dashjr
2015-09-04 0:52 ` Andy Chase
2015-09-04 0:43 ` Bryan Bishop
2015-09-04 4:40 ` Andy Chase
2015-09-04 19:20 ` Btc Drak
2015-09-04 20:13 ` Andy Chase
2015-09-04 20:31 ` Peter Todd
2015-09-04 20:42 ` Martin Becze
2015-09-04 21:05 ` Milly Bitcoin
2015-09-04 21:01 ` Luke Dashjr [this message]
2015-09-04 21:36 ` Andy Chase
2015-09-04 21:45 ` Luke Dashjr
2015-09-05 21:19 ` Andy Chase
[not found] ` <CAHv+tb5ksyZKp5jLvmzFbD2vBOUrWn6ps80ODECVRqYj8m=PZA@mail.gmail.com>
2015-09-06 20:44 ` Andy Chase
2016-01-19 2:12 ` Luke Dashjr
2016-01-19 4:23 ` Andy Chase
2016-01-19 6:07 ` Dave Scotese
2015-09-07 19:37 ` Btc Drak
2015-09-10 1:21 ` Andy Chase
2015-09-12 23:50 ` Andy Chase
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201509042101.11839.luke@dashjr.org \
--to=luke@dashjr$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=theandychase@gmail$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox