pull down to refresh

103 sats \ 3 replies \ @SimpleStacker 10h \ parent \ on: Stacker Saloon

So does it activate below 55% or not?

Maybe I don't understand the nuances between the uses of the word activation and lock-in

Or maybe their reasoning and/or communication is just off?

write
preview
1 sat \ 2 replies \ @Scoresby 10h
reply
1 sat \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 10h

Which means Melvin Carvalho is wrong right?

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @Scoresby 10h

I think so. It's possible that he is using a very different definition of activation? The only comment I have to work with was this (#1437006)

Scoresby's critique assumes that BIP-110 could fail to activate, but it can't. There's no timeout or "failed" state. Mandatory signaling forces lock-in at max_activation_height, regardless of organic support. The chain-split scenarios described rely on minority hashrate activation, but the 55% threshold prevents this.

So he clearly understands that it activates whether it gets 55% or not. He just seems to believe that it is impossible for it to get any amount of hash rate greater than 0 but less than 55%...

Don't ask me why he chose to set up his game theory matrix this way:

Also in the above tweet, he says "55% is required for lockin, below that nothing activates." I have no clue why he would make this statement and the one on SN which contradicts it.

reply