I agree with Udi. But we are talking about today. The probability that even a one-day reorg would be accepted is near zero based on all we know, and for 4-5 days it's definitely zero.https://twitter.com/hasufl/status/1169972336457637888?s=20 …
-
-
Replying to @hasufl @koeppelmann and
Re-org depends on perspective no? Under "code is law" Bitcoin nodes are expected to follow the chain with the most work, even if the longer chain appears after a day. Anything else would be an active act of social governance.
1 reply 0 retweets 26 likes -
Replying to @muellerberndt @koeppelmann and
Correct, we are talking about social intervention here. When should we use, how fast can we use it, etc.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @hasufl @koeppelmann and
You are treading in dangerous waters
@Hasu
In practice I think you're right that some form of community governance will happen in that situation if the situation is catastrophic and a large enough percentage of the community is affected.3 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @muellerberndt @hasufl and
It won't be framed as such though - there will be one group shouting "consensus is decided by nodes/users so it's OK to re-org using a snapshot" and another group shouting "Nakamoto consensus is king" plus a contentious fork.
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @muellerberndt @hasufl and
What about immutability? All this years preaching the dogma and now let's use social consensus to decide what chain we like?
4 replies 0 retweets 18 likes -
Replying to @CryptoSecundus @muellerberndt and
Radical immutability serves no purpose. Bitcoin is a tool made by humans to serve humans. If it stops being useless, we need to be able to change it (and we are - we can always move to an identical copy without e.g. a bug)
17 replies 5 retweets 44 likes -
Replying to @hasufl @CryptoSecundus and
"Serves no purpose"?! WTF?! Good grief you are one of these vile creatures: https://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2006/10/hello-kitty-people.html … You have outed yourself as an enemy of Bitcoin security. Blocked.
18 replies 20 retweets 203 likes -
Replying to @NickSzabo4 @hasufl and
I feel like I more-agree-than-disagree with the comment you're replying to. And I love Hello Kitty. Am I an enemy of Bitcoin security? I actually feel like my position (socially rejecting day-long 51% attacks

) if adopted would *increase* Bitcoin's security...13 replies 5 retweets 85 likes -
Replying to @VitalikButerin @NickSzabo4 and
I think the idea is that once you allow yourself to entertain the idea of social recovery after a 51% attack, you immediately invite the barbarians at the gate to come in and turn your cryptocurrency into a government controlled inflation fest, you thus make the system less safe.
6 replies 1 retweet 35 likes
It opens up a huge variety of possible attacks, that is only one out of a vast universe of bad things that could happen. Also it destroys the competitive advantage of cryptocurrency since bankers can do financial governance far better than anybody in the crypto space.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.