To say that Bitcoin is strongly consistent is to say that the memory pool and the last X blocks aren't part of Bitcoin. If you want to avoid making that claim, you can at best argue that Bitcoin has both a strongly consistent component AND an eventually consistent component.

The entire point of the definition of eventually consistency is that your computer system is running continously and DO NOT have a final state, and therefore you must be able to describe the behavior when your system either may give responses to queries across time that are either perfectly consistent *or not* perfectly consistent.

And Bitcoin by default *does not* ignore the contents of the last X blocks. A Bitcoin node being queried about the current blockchain state WILL give inconsistent answers when there's block rearrangements = no strong consistency. Not to mention that your definition ignores the nonzero probability of a block rearrangement extending beyond your constant omega.

Bitcoin provides a probabilistic, accumulative probability. Not a perfect one.

Den 2 mar 2016 04:04 skrev "Emin Gün Sirer" <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>:

There seems to be a perception out there that Bitcoin is eventually consistent. I wrote this post to describe why this perception is completely false. 

Bitcoin Guarantees Strong, not Eventual, Consistency
http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/03/01/bitcoin-guarantees-strong-not-eventual-consistency/

I hope we can lay this bad meme to rest. Bitcoin provides a strong guarantee.
- egs


_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev