Create account

replied 2063d
i think they manually configured the limit.
replied 2063d
I think so too. The BitcoinSV node software (there is only one implementation) defaults to a much higher softlimit.
replied 2063d
They have some early BU node implementation too. But i guess that defaults to 8 mb.
replied 2062d
BU no longer updates the SV implementation. After Feb. 2020 they will stop working when SV hardforks with the Genesis update where among other things P2SH will be removed.
replied 2062d
Interesting, then they lose a lot of software diversity.
replied 2062d
The BSV camp don't want node software diversity.
replied 2062d
And what if someone sends some magic bytes which crash the nodes? Then they will have no network for days till they fix it?
replied 2061d
Yes, that is a risk.
replied 2060d
On the other hand the risk of having multiple implementation is that (not intentional) differences in the consensus code can cause a split.
replied 2060d
True. There are pros and cons. However, I think the risk for a split is less dangerous (and much less dangerous than many make it out to be).
replied 2059d
I agree. Btc has had multiple implementations for most of its time and I don't know any of such issue.
replied 2059d
A split can be dangerous mostly for exchanges. Loss of the whole network for days are dangerous for the whole economy and for everyone.
replied 2059d
True. If an exchange end up accepting another chain which will later become a minority coin they can loose a lot of money. But I don't see a way to prevent it in an open economy.
replied 2059d
Installing two different core node software, and ensuring the balance is the same on both node. If not, cancel the transaction, and throw it back on the user.
replied 2062d
‘Alt coin’ was a stupid fucking term to begin with. Not every “coin” is a pow, form of digital currency.
replied 2062d
i think bsv had a hard fork since then - if not then they are going to afaik. which will render it incompatible.