AFAIK you could do a hard fork on any blockchain. There might be exceptions. 
If a miner solves a hash equation but his block is proven invalid and dropped, will the miner still get a block reward?
Who decides to update the network if there is no central authority running the blockchain?
Didnāt I already replied to this question in another thread? Anyway, no because the coinbase tx gets dropped with the block.
Proposals are introduces through BIPs on which the community then discusses and votes weather they will get accepted and implemented in the protocol or not.
Similar question, but different. And ok, makes sense. This must also mean he will lose money from the mining computation.
Ah very interesting.
Hi guys! Can someone please explain, if it is a protocol for the smaller chain of a fork to be returned to the mempool, in the case of hard forks why did this not happen? Why did the smaller chains continue on with the lessor accepted consensus rule, not update, and eventually form a separate coin?
This appears to go against the whole ideal of consistency that apparently underpins bitcoin no?
Iām not sure that I heard the explanation of why hard forks are generally not liked by people. Can anyone update me on this, please?
Iām not sure what you mean exactly. When a hard fork occurs it doesnāt return anything to the mempool, it simply splits the chains and both go their separate ways.
Its completely consistent with the ideal because its open source and you are free to fork as much as you want, the question is who will follow your fork in the end. If you donāt have a community that is prepared to run nodes of your chain then its basically pointless.
The reason why people hate hard forks is mostly because of the confusion and divide it generates within the community.
I was acually just about to say the same thing.
Hi,
one question from me:
- if there is an soft-fork ongoing and it turned out that we didnāt reach 51% hashpower = the update is not going through? Itās not causing any blockchain split like in hard forks so we eventually end up with no update to the network, correct? In order words, there was no buy-in for the change proposed and consequently it has been turned down by the network.
Thanks !
Yes in case a soft fork doesnāt reach 51% its considered not accepted by the network.
I understand the concept of an accidental fork. But lets say someone sends you BTC you are not the miner. If you are receiving funds that was on a forked block and it is a stale block will you receive the funds when it is appended to the blockchain or after it has gone back to the mempool and appended to the blockchain again?
It depends where the wallet gets data. If it gets these data from a stale block the user will see his balance updated but would disappear once the block gets dropped and reappear when the tx is mined again in a new block.
1 Like
I left a post on the video comment section but i want to repeat it here where it seems to be more interaction. The suggested reading on the diff between hard and soft forks already cleared this up for me but i figured id make the post anyway. I think it was really more of a semantics deal that im assuming from your accent comes from english not being your primary languge. When you say a soft fork āmakes previously valid blocks invalidā it kind of suggests that it would retroactively affect all the blocks on the chain. I can imagine for you that its common sense that that would be impossible but for a noob like myself its a bit confusing. Had you said " it makes blocks it once considered to be valid to be considered invalid from now on" it would kinda clear things up a bit.
Question:
I get that you only need more than 50% of the miners to update with a soft fork to avoid a network split. And I get that if 51%-99% of the miners update with a hard fork there will be a network split. But what if less than 50% of the miners update with a hard fork?
Am I getting it right if I say that in this last case there will be no network split despite it being a hard fork? That is because the non-updated miners would produce the longest chain and the old rules would be accepted by the updated miners, so the updated miners would end up accepting the blockchain of the non-updated miners.
1 Like
question regarding quiz
Arenāt both of those 2 answers correct?
- Miners mine the same block at the same block height but with different contents
- Different miners find a block at the same block height at the same time.
Also reg your earlier post
I donāt understand how this could happen, could you explain further please.
Hard fork is different because its bound to end up in a split chain. Even if only one node updates, it will fork from the rest of the network. It will be a very lonely node though
1 Like
The block is not the same if it has different content, Iām not sure why it was phrased like that tbh, maybe its supposed to be a trick question.
Hi, I share the same doubt as @Simon_72
I donbāt get why the hard fork is inevitable. How can a single node fork out of the network if it still accepts the nodes produced by the network?
Does it stop accepting them?
Thanks a lot for clarifying