Comment by olalonde
2 days ago
> though 20 blocks were rolled back on at least 2 occasions
Do you mean because of the bugs mentioned earlier or during the normal course of operations? Curious to read more about that.
> Regarding forks, there was BCH, BSV, etc. - those were not programming errors.
That's a different kind of "fork" though and those are arguably not Bitcoin. They're basically just competing cryptocurrencies that happened to use an existing blockchain to get started.
> Do you mean because of the bugs mentioned earlier or during the normal course of operations? Curious to read more about that.
One occasion was the 184 bn Bitcoin bug, the other was an unintentional fork due to a faulty software upgrade.
> those are arguably not Bitcoin
Q.E.D.
You proved it’s a social consensus
Naming things is, indeed. The protocol is not.
Incredibly pedantic, no less when this whole thing started with "seems like someone missed the boat"
4 replies →