people believed without proof,
he made miners sound greedy as an error,
it's part of the fabric
*NOBODY* tested it,
CSW offered a bounty for people to prove SM true.
Nobody could/can.
we all agree SM is not a present danger. but it is a geniune theoretical threat, and responsible devs ought to keep it into account when planning for the future
"we"?
You must be oblivious to what's happening
power is being taken away from devs
who have to date not been responsible for staying true to the protocol.
Being handed back2 miners.
not oblivious to that. but what does it have to do with SM as a theoretical threat? (again, not claiming it is a present danger).
theoretical threat
what IS that?
Something that looks dangerous on paper
or in peoples' minds?
dude, the math checks out. in some cases it is possible for miners to gain small advantages over others with less hashrate.
it's like blocksize. do we need 1 GB blocks now? no, we couldn't fill them if we tried. but devs need to build a system that can handle that capacity in advance of demand. play to win.
similary SM threat ought to be mitigated by design, well in advance of it becoming economically significant.
Maybe it checks out *IF* bitcoin were a mesh network
it's not,
it's a small world.
And, *again* the SM hypothesis
has NOT BEEN TESTED IN THE REAL WORLD.
in an economic environment.
assuming we are serious about BCH becoming a global currency. under that scenario, no vulnerability will be left untouched.
1st decade devs have proven to be a vulnerability,
miners are now taking control
to do their job,
Secure the network, reduce risk of failure
Guaranteeing BCH as a global currency.
hashrate has final word indeed. simple realpolitik.
