summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorMike Hearn <hearn@vinumeris.com>2015-09-28 14:54:33 +0200
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2015-09-28 12:54:34 +0000
commitf1f211932db2d7b9bd08cce2a1a3f5fe42bbea50 (patch)
treef95139a6937a45ee920734243e88f1d644d827da
parentcdc34e967ca90d41710771fcde56598888089801 (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-f1f211932db2d7b9bd08cce2a1a3f5fe42bbea50.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-f1f211932db2d7b9bd08cce2a1a3f5fe42bbea50.zip
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Let's deploy BIP65 CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY!
-rw-r--r--1c/20413639265d9c8ce00bca518d005a09970a23107
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&#39;t highly prone to systemic consensus failure.<br></div></blockquo=
+te><div><br></div><div>Just use an opcode that isn&#39;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 &quot;inherently insecur=
+e&quot; seems needlessly trollish - I certainly would disagree, but it&#39;=
+s a different debate.</div></div></div></div>
+
+--047d7bdc09f6ecd7990520ce3248--
+