Topic: [INFO] Νέα άρθρα για το Bitcoin - page 15. (Read 94555 times)

Similarly, the term “blockchain” has been so misappropriated that no one knows what it means anymore.

Bitcoin & Blockchain, Attorneys at Law: One firm's big switch

http://www.techrepublic.com/article/bitcoin-blockchain-attorneys-at-law-one-firms-big-switch/#oo

μια νέα κατηγορία δικηγόρων δημιουργείτε αυτών που θα ασχολούνται με τις νομικές υποθέσεις όσων εταιρειών τρέχουν blockchain εφαρμογές

[–]theymos [score hidden] 3 hours ago*
This rumor originated from a proposal by a random person on a Chinese forum. /r/btc, desperate as they are, interpreted the broken Google autotranslation of this post as "Chinese miners unanimously announce hardfork" instead of "Random forum user nobody's ever heard of proposes hardfork." Anyone who did even the smallest amount of research would have realized this, but cryptocoinnews is a rag, and the author of this article, aquentin, is a notorious troll with no interest in actual facts.
Miners can't do hardforks. If they could, then we'd all be trusting miners not to create more than 21 million BTC, not to steal BTC, etc. If there was any way at all that miners could do these things while not completely destroying BTC's value, then they would absolutely be incentivized to do so. For example, if Bitcoin was actually ruled by miners, then miners would jump at the chance to confiscate "stolen" BTC, since this is a theft that they could somewhat justify. This would be a terrible system, far worse than the traditional monetary system. When I see people trying to appeal to miners as if they were kings, I think, "Do you even realize what you're doing? If this was actually how it worked, why would Bitcoin have any value?"
Fortunately, Bitcoin does not work like this. Even if every miner agrees to hardfork, all full nodes will just ignore their blocks. As long as a ~majority of the Bitcoin economy is backed by independent full nodes, this ensures that miners can't change Bitcoin's hard rules. (BTW, this is one of the main reasons why it's important to keep the max block size reasonably small: if the economy isn't backed by independent full nodes, then Bitcoin is insecure and worthless, so it's important to not make running a full node so expensive that it pushes people away from running one.)
I've always kind of hoped that the XT/Classic forks would get their 75% so that we could watch whichever miners were stupid enough to sign onto it fall on their faces. They'd be back on the real chain moments after realizing that nobody would accept their mined coins.