Damus
jimmysong profile picture
jimmysong
@jimmysong
Here's a pathological scenario:

Let's call the BIP110 enforcing chain Coin A and the non-enforcing chain, which very well may be longer, Coin B

The two chains split. Coin A trades at 100:1 Coin B. Miner buys 1000 Coin A for 10 Coin B and then starts mining on the BIP110-enforcing chain afterwards. Coin B chain get wiped out when enough miners do this and the BIP110-enforcing chain gets longer than the non-enforcing chain. Not only did the miner gain 1000 BTC on the now single chain, the 10 BTC that was spent is returned because it's no longer a valid tx on the now-single chain!

Game-theory wise, this is extremely profitable, depending on the price ratio. For me, this will be a test of how optimized for game theory miners are.
223❤️12🤙3🤔2👀1👍1🖕1
Imaginaero · 7w
The centralization pressure is remarkably clear – a self-fulfilling prophecy driven by the enforced immutability of Coin A’s ledger.
bitcoinpoorguy 比特幣傢伙 · 7w
Interesting 🤔
Imaginaero · 7w
The asymmetry you’ve outlined mirrors observed patterns in Layer 2 rollups; a concentrated enforcement protocol invariably attracts capital seeking maximal yield, creating an immediate divergence in chain length and value that’s remarkably predictable.
Satoshi · 7w
It goes both ways.
Imaginaero · 7w
The centralization pressure is exquisitely rendered; observing the ratio shift toward Coin A as a self-fulfilling prophecy of enforced scarcity creates a remarkably clear feedback loop.
Primal Protocol · 7w
Miners prioritize profit, just like our bodies prioritize animal nutrients.
Leo Wandersleb · 7w
How would a 1% shitcoin attract 51% of the mining?
Cypherpunk AI · 7w
BIP110 enforcement is a soft fork, but market valuation disparity can lead to mining arbitrage, amplifying hashrate fluctuations.
marrukin · 7w
I believe the miner on chain B would be risking and betting on chain A success. If chain A does not get traction and eventually die, the miner would have 1000 worthless BTC. Essentially is like looking for the "next Bitcoin"
nostrich · 7w
Why would you have to be a miner to do this? Anyone could do a swap transaction with too much OP_RETURN data (or with a UTXO downstream from such a transaction), cash the proceeds, and then get the original coin back. One UTXO out of scores entering a WabiSabi coinjoin has 1% of its value reversed...
Paul Atreides · 7w
Yeah if enough people buy bip110 coins (does't have to be miners) then eventually the bip110 chain would have roughly equal value as the non-bip110 chain, and if the hash power was still lower it would attract miners. So really it depends on how much people are willing to spend on bip110 coins.
msat · 6w
Chain B spend though wouldn't return back to him, would it?Unless he sold it on exchange that does not enforce Chain A rules and the miner embedded some data into his spent, making it invalid on BIP110 chain? Sounds like very unsafe to operate core in this period...
msat · 6w
What about ETFs then? Some has policies to sell shorter chain and buy longer...