Sure, many things that were though only possible with hardforks initially
were later shown to be possible with softforks.
That doesn't mean hardforks should be taboo in my opinion though.
On Mon, May 24, 2021, 01:09 vjudeu via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > Beca
> Because the above block header format is hashed to generate the
> `prevBlockHash` for the *next* block, it is almost impossible to change the
> format without a hardfork.
First, assume that everything should be validated as today to be
backward-compatible. For that reason, removing SHA-256 is
Good morning vjudeu,
> > Perhaps the only things that cannot be usefully changed in a softfork is
> > the block header format and how proof-of-work is computed from the block
> > header.
>
> Why not? I can imagine a soft fork where the block header would contain
> SHA-256 and SHA-3 hashes in th
> Perhaps the only things that cannot be usefully changed in a softfork is the
> block header format and how proof-of-work is computed from the block header.
Why not? I can imagine a soft fork where the block header would contain SHA-256
and SHA-3 hashes in the same place. The SHA-256 would be c
Good morning Jorge, et al,
> Hardforks can be useful too.
> But, yes, I agree softforks are preferable whenever possible.
I think in principle the space of possible softforks is very much wider than
can be trivially expected.
For instance, maaku7 once proposed a softfork that could potentially
> fork. "Soft" forks can be useful.
>
> Raystonn
>
> --
> *From:* Jorge Timón
> *Sent:* Saturday, May 22, 2021 7:55 AM
> *To:* Raystonn . ; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> *Subject:*
: Raystonn . ; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Consensus protocol immutability is a feature
That is clearly not true. People entretain making changes to the protocol all
the time. Bitcoin is far from perfect and not improving it would be stupid in
my opinion.
Some im
That is clearly not true. People entretain making changes to the protocol
all the time. Bitcoin is far from perfect and not improving it would be
stupid in my opinion.
Some improvements require changes to the consensus rules.
Recent changes include relative lock time verify or segwit. These are
imp
Suggestions to make changes to Bitcoin's consensus protocol will only ever be
entertained if Bitcoin is completely dead without such a change. Any attempt
to change consensus protocol without a clear and convincing demonstration to
the entire network of participants that Bitcoin will die withou
