Title is a joke.
But F2pool did bailout PayPal/Paxos once already when they mined the block with Fat Finger tx. And decided to send it back instead of paying out to miners.
In 2008 fiat banks get bailed, people screwed In 2023 bitcoin banks get bailed, people screwed
Was it an honorable choice by the pool's CEO? Or an example of how mining centralization just results in a different form of central banking.
Bitcoin-core consensus decided that F2Pool owns that reward. But "social consensus" says F2Pool doesn't own it.
What's to stop social consensus from one day increasing the 21M hard cap if it can override core consensus in this way?
People act like core consensus is a natural law of the universe. There will NEVER be more than 21M... well unless everyone decides its a good idea.
Not your keys, not your coins. Or inversely stated, if the sats are "in your keys", then those are your your sats... well, unless they were sent there by "accident" by a well-known entity.
Really shows the degree of danger from centralized mining (yes I know its a pool but it still centralizes hash and block creation)
reply
If F2Pool did not return the funds, would there be a possibility of a lawsuit? Seems to be the threat of centralised mining pools.
reply
Thanks for sharing this insight. I now understand your position better, and agree. It's a slippery slope.
reply
I already post my position on this here #253404
reply
"What's to stop social consensus from one day increasing the 21M hard cap if it can override core consensus in this way?"
This is retarded and so are you. It's called "a contract" and it's astounding how few bitcoiners are at all familiar with this object type.
This post also makes it clear you do not understand bitcoin either and the basic game theory that prevents inflation.
Bitcoiners are so dumb, I have become all but convinced the Great Retardation will not end until hyperbitcoinization + 1 century.
reply