pull down to refresh

103 sats \ 2 replies \ @Mechanic2 17 Jul \ parent \ on: BIP110 AMA w/Mechanic bitcoin

There isn't one I'm interested in really. I don't really think Bitcoin can work properly outside of Core-forks (or Knots-forks if it ends up becoming the reference). Too much risk of accidental splits like with BTCD. Libbitcoin is celebrated for having some custom design that is optimized for making UTXO bloat less of a problem, but I'm not holding my breath.

write
compose
213 sats \ 1 reply \ @justin_shocknet 17 Jul

BTCD already powers most of the Lightning Network and test vectors are no different than one version of Core upgrading to another...

Every new version of Core or fork of core incurs the same risk.

Case in point, Core's database backends (Berkeley DB and LevelDB) in 2013 caused a temporary chain split.

Diversity of implementations keep whoopsies small when they do happen, rather than most of the network downloading a default

reply
18 sats \ 0 replies \ @Mechanic2 17 Jul

It's a tradeoff, I'm not trying to bash BTCD, and yes you're right, different versions of the same implementation can cause splits too.

reply