I read it a while back, it's not front of mind. I'm aware of libbitcoin. 

I'm definitely aware of that criticism, and it's a difficult issue to square away. At a really basic level, the chain enforced by the majority of nodes is the "real" Bitcoin. Any new entrant needs to ensure that it won't go out of consensus. Onus is on the new implementation. 

Optimal situation is probably only one implementation, from a consensus integrity perspective. But that leads to a different security risk. One bug could take everyone out. 

Since multiple implementations exist, no one implementation being the majority is the most secure option.

lukedewolf

Are you very familiar with Voskuil's Cryptoeconomics? or the node implementation he maintains, libbitcoin?

What do you think about the criticism that is sometimes raised toward alternative implementations that if we have a chain split between two implementations, how will we know which one is the "real" bitcoin?

security

bitcoin

I'm Luke de Wolf, Author of Defending Bitcoin, AMA

Are you very familiar with Voskuil's Cryptoeconomics? or the node implementation he maintains, libbitcoin?

What do you think about the criticism that is sometimes raised toward alternative implementations that if we have a chain split between two implementations, how will we know which one is the "real" bitcoin?