ok, i detect you farther along the path of wisdom than i.

however in the case of an actual split and instead of straight up selling the split that one doesn't want, could we just send it to LEDN, get half back, and let the other half ride. maybe it's just better to sell 100% on exchange.

is it gambling? it's just taking a loan, right? as long as bitcoin doesn't go below $30,000 or whatever

wait, how would i end up with nothing in that case " if i'm wrong"

it's either the coins on the loan are good and i just took a loan

or

the coins on the loan go to 0, but they margin call themselves at 50%....

i won't :D

what do you think about the idea of profiting from split.

is it possible for someone who is ride-or-die on BIP110 to sell coins by splitting them somehow? like take advantage of the acceptance window for large Op return transactions to send them to a custodian that wants them?

oh, so the spam initially has nothing to do with what blocks get accepted/rejected/relayed.

hmm. it's also sounds a bit like a virus binding to sites.

that happens afterwards

so do you think it's likely that the spam will slow the blocks down enough that miners submitting only clean ones get an edge?

it's reminding me of a marble roller somhow

so we have a lot of common ground! i agree with you that this brings into question even the foundations of bitcoin. it will be an interesting test of how bitcoin works.

i'm still a little unclear how the miners decide to fall... it sounds like bip110 blocks may be passed around the network just a little faster than non-compliant blocks. otherwise there is no physical advantage, it guess like it's just a social choice for miners to change?

as far as are we going to have charismatic groups pulling us every which way, my idea is there's probably some function of time/magnitude of attack. similar to how bigger storms come less frequently, but the more clogged the ditches and rivers become and the bigger the eventual flood will be.

the last big fork was before i was aware of bitcoin so it's all new to me.

your last paragraph is how I also understood bitcoin-- the distributing of trust was such that there was no risk of us being able to collude to change it.

I like your framing of how "no counterparty risk turns into not knowing what small group becomes the risky counterparty you have to worry about". The concern you are makes Bip110 sound a bit like an insurgency.

and I know you were not arguing on the Bip110 side...

However, for your stated concerns of "Are my transactions permanent? Is 21 million a cap? Is a presigned transaction I make today ever going to be able to be broadcast" -- i believe those are sacred planks of both factions? so you don't have anything to worry about...

I just saw an interview of him with Bob Burnett... I had him down as pro bip110...

hah. i can't even think of who's the most attractive person i would simp for. most of them in this corner of the internet are not *just a pretty face* and the brains do a lot of the talking.