summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorMichael Folkson <michaelfolkson@protonmail.com>2023-12-30 13:54:04 +0000
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2023-12-30 13:54:30 +0000
commit358bdd0dbda2da9748d27efab1945543e32a2f4e (patch)
tree5567ade7deb90e110ebf352edae77c9f0f76ceba
parent188d50aed1eaa033fabf2e916fb1d97341e8cae5 (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-358bdd0dbda2da9748d27efab1945543e32a2f4e.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-358bdd0dbda2da9748d27efab1945543e32a2f4e.zip
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Swift Activation - CTV
Diffstat
-rw-r--r--f3/37203e6ccc11432d9eaef85aaa977689fd03df195
1 files changed, 195 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/f3/37203e6ccc11432d9eaef85aaa977689fd03df b/f3/37203e6ccc11432d9eaef85aaa977689fd03df
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..7dabb4fce
--- /dev/null
+++ b/f3/37203e6ccc11432d9eaef85aaa977689fd03df
@@ -0,0 +1,195 @@
+Return-Path: <michaelfolkson@protonmail.com>
+Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133])
+ by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA35EC0037
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sat, 30 Dec 2023 13:54:30 +0000 (UTC)
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
+ by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97C62404F1
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sat, 30 Dec 2023 13:54:30 +0000 (UTC)
+DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 97C62404F1
+Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org;
+ dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com header.i=@protonmail.com
+ header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=protonmail3 header.b=JT9OR3aK
+X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
+X-Spam-Flag: NO
+X-Spam-Score: -2.799
+X-Spam-Level:
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5
+ tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
+ DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
+ RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
+ autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
+Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
+ by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
+ with ESMTP id 7FL-9sJYP1mU
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sat, 30 Dec 2023 13:54:29 +0000 (UTC)
+Received: from mail-0301.mail-europe.com (mail-0301.mail-europe.com
+ [188.165.51.139])
+ by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C691940143
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sat, 30 Dec 2023 13:54:28 +0000 (UTC)
+DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org C691940143
+DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
+ s=protonmail3; t=1703944460; x=1704203660;
+ bh=65DRgN2PYzuIfVBvWeQHG8QJNXAX7kOKOsjqbDML2Do=;
+ h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:
+ Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:
+ Message-ID:BIMI-Selector;
+ b=JT9OR3aKUKPqXvIf2vv3A70sO4ngWH4Dl+f/znRt4kfsXDA6FfccT9AoXg7fDGmRw
+ +vc3id7HttHMix2PGwvD1FoFhY82GIg3J1TBQZdIHmJQT9LrOAgl5ug7QkQ7o/Vndy
+ Yg8WGX3/EWepVg3PE9Y7ml/OCeSnkalNYwddk3Dq7dUZbLRiU67R6ZitR3RPNXJx1V
+ rjr7AYIM1GUyAOaXmmo97Tl6i7reHe1Pf5YBznT533I2FkJVGpqHSG7D9zfBI3K4up
+ fr4aaKFBxE1hnuwR3619iBqzyHYeQ2LvoMqzlATsPvXMWUfuZTyckCJsfWVRhNA2SQ
+ mInZj7qJySyLQ==
+Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2023 13:54:04 +0000
+To: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>
+From: Michael Folkson <michaelfolkson@protonmail.com>
+Message-ID: <7NGPxdCD3faagkDFsyhVnjyXGu_BF3PfRW86QjZxP-nsDY-EvNGlyxXSEA7nf0SYzm5Ql45sA7gDGjKNpqWQoALLUz-MROUZTGjEFtzTdm8=@protonmail.com>
+In-Reply-To: <ZY/PYiO2Yg3FNiYV@erisian.com.au>
+References: <39ecOLU7GJPGc0zWZmGuaj-a4ANySfoRjwxoUoxP480kfRRc_fsPl9MvZDC-0vSfrO3jYraHVUyxWpcg7AFHRJkEJUERYdHZlzimOwql1j0=@protonmail.com>
+ <2e113332-2cfd-73ec-0368-136728ceb31a@dashjr.org>
+ <Tp6LkEd_YZUe-0sI-EXRmGTaq4Om2RSKIOUsXS0GIsYW5z_MFnicWPz2hB1KZYJ1mihv0KrJT8DmnuDr1RCcIpFM9jCOy82BvRJySkO7Im8=@protonmail.com>
+ <fcOFuPPZB9Cn6nuIkAcvbECmYqISZQ-5O2hQGli-F8FOK68etbaGNlrMT4OuPSBFI9VjaBe_izZEgezy8KZbjeBIaO_QPNfwrF61IorSP44=@protonmail.com>
+ <ZY/PYiO2Yg3FNiYV@erisian.com.au>
+Feedback-ID: 27732268:user:proton
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 30 Dec 2023 15:58:26 +0000
+Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Swift Activation - CTV
+X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
+Precedence: list
+List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
+List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
+List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
+List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
+X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2023 13:54:30 -0000
+
+Hey AJ
+
+Thanks for this, pretty much agree with all of it. It seems like a week doe=
+sn't go by now without a new individual popping out the woodwork proposing =
+an upcoming activation of CTV with no new PoCs and no new insights. I'm not=
+ sure what it is about CTV (versus say other proposals) that it keeps attra=
+cting these people that refuse to work on PoCs or anything that drives the =
+research area forward and yet want to try to attempt activation where the s=
+uccess scenario would be a chain split.
+
+> > But "target fixation" [0] is a thing too: maybe "CTV" (and/or "APO") we=
+re just a bad approach from the start.
+
+It is hard to discuss APO in a vacuum when this is going on the background =
+but I'm interested in you grouping APO with CTV in this statement. At the t=
+ime of writing there clearly isn't consensus or advanced PoCs on any of the=
+ use cases CTV claims to enable. (One rare exception on the use case front =
+is James O'Beirne's OP_VAULT [0] that requires additional opcodes to OP_CTV=
+). But APO does seem to be the optimal design and have broad consensus in t=
+he Lightning community for enabling eltoo/LN-Symmetry. Any other use cases =
+APO enables would be an additional benefit.
+
+I don't think one can seriously think about an *upcoming* activation for AP=
+O as there is still more work to do to convince the community that it would=
+ be worth the risks of embarking on another activation process. But assumin=
+g another year of concerted work on APO and the CTV woodwork of chaos (hope=
+fully) being exhausted do you think an APO activation would be viable in sa=
+y 2025/2026? Is your hesitancy on APO based on any particular technical con=
+cerns or just fatigue from the CTV chaos?
+
+Thanks
+Michael
+
+[0]: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2023-January/0=
+21318.html
+
+--
+Michael Folkson
+Email: michaelfolkson at protonmail.com
+GPG: A2CF5D71603C92010659818D2A75D601B23FEE0F
+
+Learn about Bitcoin: https://www.youtube.com/@portofbitcoin
+
+
+On Saturday, 30 December 2023 at 08:05, Anthony Towns via bitcoin-dev <bitc=
+oin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
+
+
+> Huh, this list is still active?
+>=20
+> On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 10:34:52PM +0000, alicexbt via bitcoin-dev wrote:
+>=20
+> > I think CTV is not ready for activation yet. Although I want it to be a=
+ctivated and use payment pools, we still have some work to do and AJ is cor=
+rect that we need to build more apps that use CTV on signet.
+>=20
+>=20
+> I've said it before, and I'll say it again, but if you want to change
+> bitcoin consensus rules, IMO the sensible process is:
+>=20
+> * work out what you think the change should be
+> * demonstrate the benefits so everyone can clearly see what they are,
+> and that they're worth spending time on
+> * review the risks, so that whatever risks there may be are well
+> understood, and minimise them
+> * iterate on all three of those steps to increase the benefits and
+> reduce the risks
+> * once "everyone" agrees the benefits are huge and the risks are low,
+> work on activating it
+>=20
+> If you're having trouble demonstrating that the benefits really are
+> worth spending time on, you probably need to go back to the first step
+> and reconsider the proposal. The "covtools" and "op_cat" approaches are
+> a modest way of doing that: adding additional opcodes that mesh well
+> with CTV, increasing the benefits from making a change.
+>=20
+> But "target fixation" [0] is a thing too: maybe "CTV" (and/or "APO")
+> were just a bad approach from the start. Presumably "activate CTV"
+> is really intended as a step towards your actual goal, whether that be
+> "make it harder for totalitarians to censor payments", "replace credit
+> cards", "make lots of money", "take control over bitcoind evelopment",
+> or something else. Maybe there's a better step towards some/all of
+> whatever those goals may be than "activate CTV". Things like "txhash"
+> take that approach and go back to the first step.
+>=20
+> To me, it seems like CTV has taken the odd approach of simultaneously
+> maximising (at least perceived) risk, while minimising the potential
+> benefits. As far as maximising risk goes, it's taken Greg Maxwell's
+> "amusingly bad idea" post from bitcointalk in 2013 [1] and made the bad
+> consequence described there (namely, "coin covenants", which left Greg
+> "screaming in horror") as the centrepiece of the functionality being
+> added, per its motivation section. It then minimises the potential
+> benefits that accompany that risk by restricting the functionality being
+> provided as far as you can without neutering it entirely. If you wanted
+> a recipe for how to propose a change to bitcoin and ensure that it's
+> doomed to fail while still gathering a lot of attention, I'm honestly
+> not sure how you could come up with a better approach?
+>=20
+> [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Target_fixation
+> [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D278122.0
+>=20
+> > - Apart from a few PoCs that do not achieve anything big on mainnet, no=
+body has tried to build PoC for a use case that solves real problems
+>=20
+>=20
+> One aspect of "minimising the benefits" is that when you make something
+> too child safe, it can become hard to actually use the tool at all. Just
+> having ideas is easy -- you can just handwave over the complex parts
+> when you're whiteboarding or blogging -- the real way to test if a tool
+> is fit for purpose is to use it to build something worthwhile. Maybe a
+> great chef can create a great meal with an easy-bake oven, but there's
+> a reason it's not their tool of choice.
+>=20
+> Cheers,
+> aj
+> _______________________________________________
+> bitcoin-dev mailing list
+> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
+
generated by cgit v1.2.3 (git 2.39.1) at 2025-04-30 09:51:05 +0000