diff options
author | Mike Hearn <hearn@vinumeris.com> | 2015-09-28 14:54:33 +0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-09-28 12:54:34 +0000 |
commit | f1f211932db2d7b9bd08cce2a1a3f5fe42bbea50 (patch) | |
tree | f95139a6937a45ee920734243e88f1d644d827da | |
parent | cdc34e967ca90d41710771fcde56598888089801 (diff) | |
download | pi-bitcoindev-f1f211932db2d7b9bd08cce2a1a3f5fe42bbea50.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-f1f211932db2d7b9bd08cce2a1a3f5fe42bbea50.zip |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Let's deploy BIP65 CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY!
-rw-r--r-- | 1c/20413639265d9c8ce00bca518d005a09970a23 | 107 |
1 files changed, 107 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/1c/20413639265d9c8ce00bca518d005a09970a23 b/1c/20413639265d9c8ce00bca518d005a09970a23 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..1a242ebee --- /dev/null +++ b/1c/20413639265d9c8ce00bca518d005a09970a23 @@ -0,0 +1,107 @@ +Return-Path: <hearn@vinumeris.com> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E78C14BE + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 28 Sep 2015 12:54:34 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from mail-ig0-f176.google.com (mail-ig0-f176.google.com + [209.85.213.176]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCF221CF + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 28 Sep 2015 12:54:33 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by igbni9 with SMTP id ni9so49043780igb.0 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 28 Sep 2015 05:54:33 -0700 (PDT) +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=vinumeris.com; s=google; + h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to + :cc:content-type; + bh=a/woiLuEsa8tiPp+yI0VeytBB8w9Y/MNad3KgdWH6yU=; + b=MLSSer6IBoua+oDTHAeF+SwVTG/j7cu8SujDST2NGP8vYcmgiv2P48mxe2FkQLOMyB + zKuR3AY14CpuiaJYcfDnRN8jOvsKiFy9R/ybeBygNQttU4fz+MQ6tXg7VFCZz2fUJwgw + 5ltPmExLbp3w1NAk98nmS9ILg4VWG6eeA47PM= +X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=1e100.net; s=20130820; + h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date + :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; + bh=a/woiLuEsa8tiPp+yI0VeytBB8w9Y/MNad3KgdWH6yU=; + b=WMcNhGoCgdTWcv/+ST2Xk14IhIu35ywU7y7Qt8b2tSu1BWMlOMGzP6cTIbCXdVsDCi + 4MozXpPs66sqiCDeAO/hP9rPeGWs9A+/5qQuzPRXez0pTHteCCm2mSYBxM5Ku5/Oq3LK + 8to9fJhKgJ+uGrTdTHV3CCFJrYdzBEZZlsoa8vAFpOWZyDgKs2qfuqlAaDAowH98aDSO + 5qJeljbPPUKbeOpB6P9uRLXWrG0xHgYy5XrI7hweyTHvD55NOz70dCmpuXLfGxyGWR02 + Wvqzi712HDlF1IMVds/XZdzTyFhDfCNf/nDZNrtjlycr7TpnYwJa1QjHcPim8E4VOtLG + je4w== +X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmw0pCGfrWDPOaKuH80qPXjN4zP+a+lf8abx5Gq6vKFpbE89HzwPuHCLYgZdKMBqfg7PDTv +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Received: by 10.50.66.146 with SMTP id f18mr15914831igt.83.1443444873278; + Mon, 28 Sep 2015 05:54:33 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.50.226.144 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Sep 2015 05:54:33 -0700 (PDT) +In-Reply-To: <C0E61EA6-76BE-45E0-8983-A3BC26CC64CF@gmail.com> +References: <20150927185031.GA20599@savin.petertodd.org> + <CA+w+GKRCVr-9TVk66utp7xLRgTxNpxYoj3XQE-6y_N8JS6eO6Q@mail.gmail.com> + <CALqxMTFEme9gYHTAVVLtFc4JCK4hoBLXEhMCRdEXK9cWso_pUA@mail.gmail.com> + <CA+w+GKQ8xos6S_BBMqZy6wieFCG=eNxahKXrx3mVKuZcxzjruw@mail.gmail.com> + <4965E9A0-0FF1-4A3F-9165-A21AF976E229@gmail.com> + <CA+w+GKSm2Np92+NA77nNMB5LqSyO0=W8dziiMtGO=Jf+7KidHQ@mail.gmail.com> + <C0E61EA6-76BE-45E0-8983-A3BC26CC64CF@gmail.com> +Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 14:54:33 +0200 +Message-ID: <CA+w+GKS74iF2FNuHtds=3R9++sx9ZP-0tcq_j5XqZw9-6uHkVQ@mail.gmail.com> +From: Mike Hearn <hearn@vinumeris.com> +To: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com> +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bdc09f6ecd7990520ce3248 +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, + DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham + version=3.3.1 +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on + smtp1.linux-foundation.org +Cc: Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Let's deploy BIP65 CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY! +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 +Precedence: list +List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 12:54:34 -0000 + +--047d7bdc09f6ecd7990520ce3248 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 + +> +> we have NO hard fork mechanism in place that isn't highly prone to +> systemic consensus failure. +> + +Just use an opcode that isn't currently defined. Done. What about that +mechanism is prone to failure? + +Re: coma. No need for insults. Please read my article and address the +points raised there, which, by the way, do not include any mention of SPV +wallets. Although your belief that SPV wallets are "inherently insecure" +seems needlessly trollish - I certainly would disagree, but it's a +different debate. + +--047d7bdc09f6ecd7990520ce3248 +Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo= +ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c= +cc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div>we have NO hard fork mechanism in place tha= +t isn't highly prone to systemic consensus failure.<br></div></blockquo= +te><div><br></div><div>Just use an opcode that isn't currently defined.= + Done. What about that mechanism is prone to failure?</div><div>=C2=A0</div= +><div>Re: coma. No need for insults. Please read my article and address the= + points raised there, which, by the way, do not include any mention of SPV = +wallets. Although your belief that SPV wallets are "inherently insecur= +e" seems needlessly trollish - I certainly would disagree, but it'= +s a different debate.</div></div></div></div> + +--047d7bdc09f6ecd7990520ce3248-- + |