Why Bitcoin needs a fallback plan for BIP148

The New York Consensus is gradually moving forward. OKcoin and Huobi, two major domestic Bitcoin trading platforms that have always been cautious about expansion, have recently announced their support for the New York Consensus SegWit2x plan . On June 15, a Bitcoin software upgrade meeting was held in Chengdu. Finally, a resolution to implement the New York Consensus plan was reached in the form of a roundtable meeting. Against this backdrop, some developers who are unwilling to give up are still trying to undermine the New York Consensus, splitting the Bitcoin blockchain and Bitcoin through UASF ( BIP148 or User Activated Soft Fork), and even promoting August 1 as "Bitcoin Independence Day."

UASF: User Activated Soft Fork. Developers change the node running software by adding a mandatory set of rules, making some valid blocks in the past invalid after the UASF is executed. This method does not require winning the support of the majority of computing power . The UASF protocol attempts to destroy most of the economic activities in the blockchain through a 51% attack, which is called " deletion ".

On August 1, if there is computing power to support UASF, even if it does not have the support of the majority of computing power, segregated verification can be activated. It is reported that some well-known mining pools in the world have clearly expressed their support for users to choose UASF. For example, Bitfury , a world-renowned Bitcoin mining pool and mining machine operator, successfully mined a block with the BIP 148 (UASF Segwit) label on March 24 , which indicates that the mining pool supports the UASF proposal. Therefore, the Bitcoin network faces the risk of splitting on August 1.

BIP148 is also very dangerous for exchanges or other commercial activities. Activating the segregated test in the BIP148 way without gaining broad community consensus will cause the Bitcoin blockchain to be divided into the BIP148 chain and the original Bitcoin chain. The BIP148 chain supported by a small number of computing power may face the risk of stopping growth due to the low mining rewards for miners, which is also the risk of permanent stagnation faced by UASF. Most of the companies and individuals supporting BIP148 are speculators. Mining activities on the BIP148 chain may be terminated at any time if it is unprofitable . Investors and exchanges promoted by BIP148 will also face the embarrassing situation of getting nothing.

BIP148 lacks the necessary replay protection measures, and transactions will be propagated on two chains and confirmed on two chains. A similar problem occurred in Ethereum. Last year, a hard fork occurred during the Ethereum software upgrade, and Ether existed on two different chains. If BIP148 is implemented on August 1, exchanges must suspend all Bitcoin deposit and withdrawal services and implement their own Bitcoin splitting methods to reduce the risk of forks during the Bitcoin network upgrade phase.

The existence of the BIP148 chain may lead to the disappearance of the original Bitcoin chain, because the economic activities on the original chain will be cleared after the BIP148 fork is executed. BIP148 is mainly aimed at enterprises and users who do not agree to activate isolated verification without large blocks. This will cause instability in the Bitcoin system and even lead to catastrophic consequences. The difficulty and risk of chain reorganization are also greater than expected.

In the face of the threat of BIP148, the community already has three development teams working for the smooth implementation of the New York Consensus. The community has also proposed a contingency plan for BIP148, UAHF ( User Activated Hard Fork), where developers change the node running software by adding a mandatory rule set, making previously invalid blocks valid after UAHF execution, and there is no need to enforce it with the support of the majority of computing power. Regardless of their computing power, nodes with changed rule sets will follow the chain. Even if different community members hold different views and visions, the UAHF protocol can serve as a starting point for their pursuit of peace and voluntariness. Even with the vast majority of computing power, UAHF will not attack other blocks.

Finally, the New York Consensus and the China Roundtable are the result of the community’s efforts. We should cherish this hard-won great achievement, ensure the smooth implementation of the New York Consensus, deploy and activate isolated verification as soon as possible, and completely eliminate the threats brought by BIP148.