diff options
| author | Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> | 2022-01-18 22:09:45 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2022-01-18 22:10:03 +0000 |
| commit | ae98919bb41713094338160973f54c3a5b55ed06 (patch) | |
| tree | 3fe888a680bfa63a7a081e00579fff150b1ddcb2 | |
| parent | c0a1d7782e027832857cc0a7d3fa3adcc86c1362 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-ae98919bb41713094338160973f54c3a5b55ed06.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-ae98919bb41713094338160973f54c3a5b55ed06.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] CTV BIP review
| -rw-r--r-- | ff/e5e114107def4ad2d9db39a8633f5ce9266af6 | 103 |
1 files changed, 103 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/ff/e5e114107def4ad2d9db39a8633f5ce9266af6 b/ff/e5e114107def4ad2d9db39a8633f5ce9266af6 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..121e1c004 --- /dev/null +++ b/ff/e5e114107def4ad2d9db39a8633f5ce9266af6 @@ -0,0 +1,103 @@ +Return-Path: <luke@dashjr.org> +Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) + by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DE25C002F + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 18 Jan 2022 22:10:03 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6523D60A99 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 18 Jan 2022 22:10:03 +0000 (UTC) +X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -2.217 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.217 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.117, + RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] + autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no +Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); + dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dashjr.org +Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id oj8pnsOPR4x5 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 18 Jan 2022 22:10:02 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 +Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [192.3.11.21]) + by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 405D260A88 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 18 Jan 2022 22:10:02 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from ishibashi.lan (unknown [12.151.133.18]) + (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) + by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2918838A1D95; + Tue, 18 Jan 2022 22:09:47 +0000 (UTC) +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=dashjr.org; s=zinan; + t=1642543801; bh=HxXvs57O6Bh1oLMo75KomuPMXHo9S9NHZyWV6Qcqzsw=; + h=From:To:Subject:Date:Cc:References:In-Reply-To; + b=X76HCS6+OiHeBOp8gf7wWz9Sq4iW4DVR7Fyq/d3Y6tYpH6Cfj9RV3qMScsX+fDDo/ + 5I3qxEB3qzSZ8cD4BLbnzF7wW0Scx5opYqXqlG/YIm3/m+pjxlJm3MnRDSTfo27ieH + mlPNmDhE+Xu6EQXcHnsKgDxBoGBoJbNPbfrIDcNo= +X-Hashcash: 1:25:220118:eric@voskuil.org::J7NlJQ9ErWFandHW:8C5z +X-Hashcash: 1:25:220118:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::1WIppBJhKy9BnIsg:asKuE +From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> +To: eric@voskuil.org +Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 22:09:45 +0000 +User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 +References: <202201182119.02687.luke@dashjr.org> + <02cc01d80cb7$1339c050$39ad40f0$@voskuil.org> +In-Reply-To: <02cc01d80cb7$1339c050$39ad40f0$@voskuil.org> +X-KMail-QuotePrefix: > +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: Text/Plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Disposition: inline +Message-Id: <202201182209.46044.luke@dashjr.org> +Cc: 'Bitcoin Protocol Discussion' <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] CTV BIP review +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: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 22:10:03 -0000 + +On Tuesday 18 January 2022 22:02:24 eric@voskuil.org wrote: +> The only material distinction between BIP9 and BIP8 is that the latter may +> activate without signaled support of hash power enforcement. +> +> As unenforced soft forks are not "backward compatible" they produce a chain +> split. + +Enforcement of the Bitcoin consensus protocol is by users, not miners. + +Softforks never produce a chain split. Miners can, and might try to do it to +cause disruption in retaliation, but the softfork itself does not. + +> It was for this reason alone that BIP8 never gained sufficient +> support. + +BIP 8 in fact achieved consensus for Taproot activation. + +> This is one of the most misleading statements I've seen here. It's not +> technically a lie, because it states what "should" happen. But it is +> clearly intended to lead people to believe that BIP8 was actually used +> ("again") - it was not. ST was some technical tweaks to BIP9. + +BIP 8 was used to activate Taproot. + +> The outright deception around this one topic has led to significant +> unnecessary conflict in the community. Make your argument, but make it +> honestly. + +You are the one attempting to deceive here. + +Luke + |