OverviewExploreTrending
Nostr Archives
OverviewExploreTrending
Super Testnet25d ago
What if they don't signal support for BIP110 but just stop mining txs that violate the BIP110 rules, to avoid losing 8% of their users? I don't want OP_IF in taproot to become "effectively invalid" just because miners opt to comply with a bad BIP out of economic interests
💬 1 replies

Thread context

Root: ef06c4935833…

Replying to: a8b97024c422…

Replies (1)

Aaron van Wirdum25d ago
Last I checked BIP110 will have a mandatory signaling window in August, so if miners don’t signal, BIP110 nodes will in fact fork themselves off the network. Your scenario could still happen if miners do signal (which non-BIP110 won’t care about one way or the other). That’s why IMO it’s still good to pay attention to signaling, and if there is any it’s probably time to start considering a URSF. The worst case scenario is if miners don’t signal until very shortly before the mandatory signaling period starts. (Or even when it’s already started.) In that case I suppose the rejectblock command can still offer a solution, but it’d be a bit of a last-minute scramble…
0000 sats