Meh. Whenever anyone suggests changing the rules, we tell them to go make their own competing block chain and see which one wins.
This guy did exactly that. Now we get to watch and see which one wins.
I only wish he'd told the devs in advance so they could have deployed a node with extra debug logging to monitor the chain reorg logic. The first 24 hours saw an amazing churn in the ixcoin chain, making a spectacular test of the code. While we can now have some faith that our reorg logic is sound and can withstand some serious beaning, we will probably never get another chance to record it working under severe stress.
This guy did exactly that. Now we get to watch and see which one wins.
I only wish he'd told the devs in advance so they could have deployed a node with extra debug logging to monitor the chain reorg logic. The first 24 hours saw an amazing churn in the ixcoin chain, making a spectacular test of the code. While we can now have some faith that our reorg logic is sound and can withstand some serious beaning, we will probably never get another chance to record it working under severe stress.
Not necessarily. They can just create another testnet equivalent and invite people to mine it like crazy. I think with ixcoin it was a few people endowed with a lot of hashing power that raped the network initially. I remember seeing one dude put in like 23 Ghashes into it right when it was launched. But yeah I agree it would've been neat to have a node record network stats and whatnot and see what we can learn from a super rapid adoption rate.
Ixcoin breaking the ice sort of speak makes me wonder if we'll start seeing a lot more "mee too" forks.
A difficulty DECREASE is very much welcome for a change.
