<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>jimmysong wrote</title><author_name>jimmysong (npub10v…psp42)</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.now/npub10vlhsqm4qar0g42p8g3plqyktmktd8hnprew45w638xzezgja95qapsp42</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.now</provider_url><html>Here&#39;s a pathological scenario:&#xA;&#xA;Let&#39;s call the BIP110 enforcing chain Coin A and the non-enforcing chain, which very well may be longer, Coin B&#xA;&#xA;The two chains split. Coin A trades at 100:1 Coin B. Miner buys 1000 Coin A for 10 Coin B and then starts mining on the BIP110-enforcing chain afterwards. Coin B chain get wiped out when enough miners do this and the BIP110-enforcing chain gets longer than the non-enforcing chain. Not only did the miner gain 1000 BTC on the now single chain, the 10 BTC that was spent is returned because it&#39;s no longer a valid tx on the now-single chain!&#xA;&#xA;Game-theory wise, this is extremely profitable, depending on the price ratio. For me, this will be a test of how optimized for game theory miners are.</html></oembed>