Calling on AntPool to promise to cancel forks below 25% and maintain the unity of Bitcoin

1. 75% hash rate fork
As we all know, Classic is preparing to upgrade to 2M with a hard fork if it gets 75% of the hashrate support. Many people are worried that a 75% hashrate fork will cause a split in Bitcoin - if the remaining 25% of the hashrate insists on mining the old fork, it will cause both the old and new Bitcoins to run at the same time. This will cause market chaos and a sharp drop in the price of the currency.

2. 90% hash rate fork
Therefore, many people have called for a safe 90% computing power hard fork, but a 90% fork also has a big problem, which gives a few people the power to control the entire Bitcoin world.

Assuming that the Mt.Gox exchange has not collapsed yet, due to the huge currency deficit, Mt.Gox certainly does not want the currency price to rise (Mt.Gox actually collapsed in the bull market of 2013). Therefore, the most sensible way for Mt.Gox to save its life is to control a certain amount of computing power and then refuse to expand the capacity, delay the expansion crisis as much as possible, reduce the number of new Bitcoin users, and thus suppress the rise in currency prices .

Bitcoin is no longer a toy in the virtual world, but a real project with millions of users. In the real world, it is unreasonable to require a 90% majority to pass - the US Constitution requires a 2/3 majority of the Senate and House of Representatives and a 3/4 majority of the state legislature to pass; the Chinese Constitution requires a 2/3 majority of the National People's Congress to pass; many referendums, such as the recent Brexit, only require a 50% majority to pass - requiring a 90% majority will only give a very small number of people the power to control the entire group .

3. Fork Solution Example
In the real world, if a 75% majority is required for a bill to be passed, will there be no forks or splits? Of course there will be. After Lincoln was elected as the President of the United States in 1860, the 11 southern states of the United States that demanded the retention of slavery created a fork of the Confederate States of America on the main chain of the United States of America.

The result of the bifurcation can be simply summarized in one sentence - the minority obeys the majority, and the 9.1 million people in the South are subject to the 22.3 million people in the North. The result of the American Civil War maintained the unity of the United States, promoted the industrialization of the United States, and laid the foundation for the United States to become a world power.

4. Hashrate maintains Bitcoin unity
Bitcoin must maintain unity. The coexistence of two Bitcoins will have disastrous consequences far greater than the North-South split in the United States, and the price of the currency may even be wiped out. This requires the military force of the Bitcoin world - computing power to assume the obligation to maintain the unity of Bitcoin .

Miners are obliged to kill any fork with less than 25% of the computing power after the fork - whether it is Core, Classic or any later version of the fork. We can accept the existence of other non-Bitcoin forks - such as CoreCoin or ClassicCoin - but at any time, only one Bitcoin is allowed to exist .

Specifically, after the fork, the party with large computing power will use its computing power to conduct a 51% attack on the fork with small computing power without packaging any transactions. In other words, all the blocks mined will not package any transactions. If a block with packaged transactions is mined by a small computing power, the block with transactions will be isolated and invalidated with the dominant computing power, thereby preventing any transactions from being conducted on the fork with small computing power, killing the fork and preventing any user from losing coins due to the fork .

5. The 2M Hard Fork Call Plan
There are some practical problems in the implementation of the specific plan: Who should spend money to cancel the small computing power fork? If this problem is not handled properly, it can easily lead to the tragedy of the commons. The fairest way is for a mining pool to be responsible for canceling it, and then all mining pools share the cost, but this will lead to complex coordination problems and uncertainty.

Therefore, based on the specific circumstances of this fork, I call on Ant Pool to commit to invalidating forks below 25% and maintain the unity of Bitcoin.

① AntPool has the ability to maintain the unity of Bitcoin : AntPool accounts for 21% of the total network computing power. With the subsequent launch of the new S9 mining machine, the computing power of one company is enough to cancel the small computing power fork. Bitmain's successful sales of a series of mining machines such as S5 and S7 also enable AntPool to have sufficient financial resources to bear the cost of cancellation.

② Antpool has a motivation to maintain the unity of Bitcoin : Unlike Mt.Gox, whose purpose is unclear, everyone knows that Bitmain simply hopes that the price of the currency will rise. Bitmain makes money by selling mining machines. The higher the price of the currency, the better the mining machines sell, and the higher the profit of Bitmain.

③Antpool has an obligation to maintain the unity of Bitcoin : Bitmain’s mining machine revenue is essentially the computing power security fee paid by Bitcoin holders to miners. As the saying goes, if you take money from others, you will eliminate disasters for them. Coin holders have paid billions of security fees to Bitmain, so Bitmain naturally has an obligation to protect the interests of coin holders and maintain the unity of Bitcoin.

Interestingly, from a game theory perspective, Antpool may be able to cancel the small computing power fork just by making a promise without paying much cost . Which mining pool can surpass Antpool's computing power, financial resources and determination? In an emergency, Antpool can also rent computing power from large miners and other mining pools at a high price, and large miners who have bought Antminers and other mining pools that support the fork will inevitably sell Antpool this face.

Therefore, since we know that Antpool is definitely inferior to Antpool in terms of computing power, financial resources and motivation, and that small computing power forks will fail and mining will definitely lose money, who would mine small computing power forks ? In the end, Antpool will have to face at most a few solo miners who forgot to upgrade their versions.

The unification of Bitcoin has promoted the development of Bitcoin and will also lay the foundation for Bitcoin to become a world currency.

I know someone is going to misread this:

You are instigating Ants to attack the Core small fork.

So I will respond first:

I call on Ant to cancel any small computing power forks, whether it is Core, Classic or any future versions of small branches, in order to maintain the unity of Bitcoin.
We can accept the existence of other non-Bitcoin forks - such as CoreCoin or ClassicCoin - but at any time, only one Bitcoin is allowed to exist.