pull down to refresh
202 sats \ 3 replies \ @Filiprogrammer 1h \ on: A soft fork is a 51% attack on Bitcoin bitcoin
A 51% attack would be a single entity reorging the chain because they have the majority of the hash rate.
A soft fork does NOT require a 51% attack. We had soft forks in the past. It just requires consensus among at least >50% of the hash rate.
What is the difference between "consensus among at least >50% of the hash rate" and a single entity with a majority of the hash rate?
reply
One turns Bitcoin from decentralized into centralized.
The other is just the usual decentralized consensus forming.
reply
I suspect that it is difficult to make a distinction between "centralized" and "decentralized consensus forming."
Decentralization doesn't necessarily mean good decisions, just like democracy doesn't necessarily mean good decisions. Decentralization just helps us share risk.
It's not hard to imagine a decentralized consensus forming around something that you and I consider antithetical to Bitcoin (for instance, the jpeg people are somewhat decentralized).
My point here is not whether a soft fork is good or bad and I agree that we've had many soft forks in the past, but I want to point out that the mechanism is surprisingly similar to that of an attack.
reply