fluidjax
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 740
Merit: 552



View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
December 27, 2017, 01:20:42 AM

I don’t need to trust anyone. It’s a pain if miners collude and 51% attack me, but with a full node I just fail to get new blocks and together with others (probably everyone else) we are forced to change to a new set of miners who behave and use the real Bitcoin rules.

But this is another discussion,  and is irelevant to my point, which I will restate.... if I can’t run a full node I need to trust miners.
Don’t shift the argument, address the real issue!


I don't know why this belief is pervasive with small blockers, especially since the white paper says the opposite.  

If the hash power majority is dishonest, they can re-org the blockchain at will such that the transactions that created your coins never occurred in the re-orged blockchain.  

This is Bitcoin 101.  You have to trust that the hash power majority remains honest.  


So what you are saying is because the miners can re-org the chain back to when my coins were a reward, probably 1000s of blocks ago, this risk means I should now accept all other more immediate and subtle  risks they can throw at me.
Disappearing coins I can detect without a full node, but changes to inflation rules I can’t.
You are asking everyone to accept more risk, but you aren’t being honest about it.

Why don’t you come out and say it straight, big blocks will increase the trust required in miners, and it represents an increased risk to your financial sovereignty, it’s indisputable, the only thing to argue over is the magnitude.