Jorge Timón [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2015-09-16 📝 Original message:No, 95% is safer and will ...

📅 Original date posted:2015-09-16
📝 Original message:No, 95% is safer and will produce less orphaned blocks.
0%is fine to do it in your own blocks.

I agree on using height vs time. Rusty, what do you mean by being easier
for bip writers? How is writing "block x" any harder than writing "date y".
On Sep 16, 2015 4:32 PM, "Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Jorge Timón <jtimon at jtimon.cc> wrote:
>
>> For enforcing new restrictions on your own blocks (thus at the policy
>> level, not consensus) you don't need to wait for 75%. You can do it from
>> the start (this way all miners setting the bit will enforce the new
>> restrictions.
>>
> At 75%, you have a pretty solid super-majority.
>
> You can safely reject blocks that have the bit set but are invalid
> according to the new rule (as long as everyone who sets the bit does it
> too).
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150916/2eb2025c/attachment.html>;