Analyzing the 2013 Bitcoin fork \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

Analyzing the 2013 Bitcoin fork 21ideas.org/en/analyzing-2013-fork/

2801 sats \ 6 comments \ @Tony 20 Mar bitcoin

view all related items

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek 20 Mar

The IRC logs are funny to read:

01:06 sipa there has never been a hardfork, ever

exactly 22 hours later:

23:06 Luke-Jr so??? yay accidental hardfork? :x

Thanks for sharing, I really like to dig into bitcoin history.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @cointastical 21 Mar freebie

You can see the moment at which there was no further debate as to what to do:

23:45 DBordello What chain is Mt. Gox on 23:45 gavinandresen Eleuthria: if you can cleanly get us back on the 0.7 chain, ACK from here, too 23:45 MagicalTux DBordello: we stopped import before the fork 23:45 Eleuthria alright

http://bitcoinstats.com/irc/bitcoin-dev/logs/2013/03/11#l1363045508.0

Which is further evidence that it is economic nodes and not miners who control Bitcoin. In this case, there was mt. Gox with like 80% (educated guess) of the economic activity of Bitcoin at the time. So a miner (pool) switches to follow the will of the economic nodes (i.e., whichever side Mt. Gox was on), even when that one pool alone had majority hashrate (both sides combined).

10 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 20 Mar

Very good piece from Bitcoin history. Thank you for remembering this.

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @Tony OP 20 Mar

It is super interesting! We also added this article on all Bitcoin forks originally from BitMex Research: https://21ideas.org/en/bitcoin-forks/

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @0xIlmari 21 Mar

Bitcoin Core devs no longer have the respect and "strong leadership". They lost it in the Ordinals debacle (starting with allowing it in the first place, and trying to "fix" it through basically censorship). I don't dare to think what a repeat of such an event would turn into in present day.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @cyberpunk02 20 Mar

thanks @Tony