diff options
| author | Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org> | 2017-03-07 09:37:15 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2017-03-07 17:37:17 +0000 |
| commit | fdb1c904fdeb8453841a8e7be9711a23ce0016c2 (patch) | |
| tree | 200448c21518a83c41c6781c6588b0c425d26b14 | |
| parent | b94196a7cafb2c57dce3ad6d03aac22a5abc1ab4 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-fdb1c904fdeb8453841a8e7be9711a23ce0016c2.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-fdb1c904fdeb8453841a8e7be9711a23ce0016c2.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Moving towards user activated soft fork activation
| -rw-r--r-- | 8c/36e97e6392d6d1025490d15d918ae1027fd3b7 | 167 |
1 files changed, 167 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/8c/36e97e6392d6d1025490d15d918ae1027fd3b7 b/8c/36e97e6392d6d1025490d15d918ae1027fd3b7 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..531a3af63 --- /dev/null +++ b/8c/36e97e6392d6d1025490d15d918ae1027fd3b7 @@ -0,0 +1,167 @@ +Return-Path: <eric@voskuil.org> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E47B0826 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 7 Mar 2017 17:37:17 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from mail-pf0-f172.google.com (mail-pf0-f172.google.com + [209.85.192.172]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2327B181 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 7 Mar 2017 17:37:17 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by mail-pf0-f172.google.com with SMTP id j5so3162760pfb.2 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 07 Mar 2017 09:37:16 -0800 (PST) +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; + h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version + :in-reply-to; bh=dXzuR57aCuLVNSOeU3bY+OHipcEhzg2S5nW0udVgPVg=; + b=cRlbfzYMmw9Fj5eh81YuReb97gum8vaDWFU6fJPMsdrhMFScuRZSFgrMqsu+6hFwXc + L+0PBiIdMfw+VyjmcwnMvwBewBnLuNeFMvPzllK8v5xayvEaacNE5IeFbXGK65/VJ/+T + Kt2QGu2pJikVaxm+68XjLJydy+gRWrTn95gMB2gYeZWUG0MorbhMg6L891q0zZgPva2J + 11pqxpuncd0UMC7OgA7dBgE1Mc24wrE49xIJmd7WNhj0rNjMF40tTYZS33+vtYk/R2jt + o5B4cLdHwj0M7kZSR+AbmxXc53p5g66wCzgXi6Ti+4xQQonog/W9u05YATenpND3mokA + qQHg== +X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=1e100.net; s=20161025; + h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date + :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; + bh=dXzuR57aCuLVNSOeU3bY+OHipcEhzg2S5nW0udVgPVg=; + b=RjrQ8jogGTb3Cn/+Nhv/uajyX+hYKZCFB+Jj/6Wfu2lA1vT/L9yhffzdkchnoYf+i9 + 47pMj8elaEZoCyusKquHmPknG66uf6P5x9KUN9Ql7xcJxsY8Z6lAlZGyVd9CkhJwnKDe + XOwSpDujlB0Z7f8k4aM9ONbdkoXjNuL22Wt4tP2Ft4jdduNKMkwi8xE8vBgH+IYP7cNI + UJBmlOs8mytQIjvcDRVvGZ+8syb0wX7GYxXvEtnLDvGKRL+AlLW/LR8ODQKpN9pH7Niz + EbOCaPP/kzAoGSCKX9maIEaD5FdMDVJDfr1zkW3GlMjMnaohnTT13PxIyjTKjoG7lqSg + aUuQ== +X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nVPwoStgB11kML+XWKFQs8ihx0Fmw48xPyZcCDpN6Wl7+NeCcrgew01cEbS09O9Q== +X-Received: by 10.84.208.102 with SMTP id f35mr2085352plh.19.1488908236495; + Tue, 07 Mar 2017 09:37:16 -0800 (PST) +Received: from ?IPv6:2601:600:9000:d69e:c467:7fa5:342:3b51? + ([2601:600:9000:d69e:c467:7fa5:342:3b51]) + by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id + g85sm1034589pfd.89.2017.03.07.09.37.15 + (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); + Tue, 07 Mar 2017 09:37:15 -0800 (PST) +To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org, + Libbitcoin Development <libbitcoin@lists.dyne.org> +References: <0ba5bf9c-5578-98ce-07ae-036d0d71046b@riseup.net> + <CAFVRnyomgeXu2pRO=+B7bwB-bZdEL2DcpJNPMz=tAhht6eZXAQ@mail.gmail.com> + <CANN4kmcLTcqHL53tEFk=g9o0_PsGzwArm9wgd0__ZXZpvhrs1g@mail.gmail.com> + <CAFVRnyr4QoU5Rn2ryQ-jG8sZ18J7NKcpd3Cg+uN1sfiA=FiB+Q@mail.gmail.com> + <CA+su7OV0Cpe=4AKdNhJXOCbYVriEN1vHSoA_0r31GXCAP1=NCA@mail.gmail.com> + <964E4801-234F-4E30-A040-2C63274D27F2@posteo.net> + <CA+su7OXOfG2AsLqh-i4YZHc42tFPm+4OBqOV4jCrpADtx4U71g@mail.gmail.com> +From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org> +X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N0110 +Message-ID: <48f6c6a5-ba7e-cf75-e272-e713321f04b8@voskuil.org> +Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 09:37:15 -0800 +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 + Thunderbird/45.5.1 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +In-Reply-To: <CA+su7OXOfG2AsLqh-i4YZHc42tFPm+4OBqOV4jCrpADtx4U71g@mail.gmail.com> +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; + boundary="0es2irxUKE31CaAQ2d8FMpNfHRQ7TxuHL" +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, + DKIM_VALID, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, + RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1 +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on + smtp1.linux-foundation.org +X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 17:43:34 +0000 +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Moving towards user activated soft fork activation +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 +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, 07 Mar 2017 17:37:18 -0000 + +This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) +--0es2irxUKE31CaAQ2d8FMpNfHRQ7TxuHL +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +On 03/06/2017 05:07 PM, Edmund Edgar via bitcoin-dev wrote: +> On 7 March 2017 at 08:23, Gareth Williams <gjw@posteo.net> wrote: +>> What you're describing is a hashpower activated soft fork to censor +transactions, in response to a user activated soft fork that the +majority of hashpower disagrees with. + +This definition of censorship would apply to all validation. + +A miner is free to select whatever transactions he wants, for whatever +reasons he wants. Bitcoin's defense against censorship (and disruption) +is in the broad distribution of over 50% (anecdotally) of the hash power +among a large number of people. + +> Well, they'd be censoring transactions to prevent the thing from +> activating in the first place. (As opposed to censoring a subset of +> those transactions to enforce the new rule, which is the behaviour +> that the people promoting the change want.) + +Exactly, a soft fork expects that people start rejecting a previously +valid style of transaction, or that they ignore it. It's perfectly +reasonable to conclude that some miners may continue to accept the +soft-fork-invalidated transactions and instead reject the new style of +transactions as invalid. Reliance on their acceptance of the soft fork +is based on the weak assumption that they won't change their software or +that they live in fear of a retaliatory POW change. + +>> Bitcoin only works if the majority of hashpower is not hostile to the +users. + +Honesty in this context refers to double spending. Selecting a different +rule set effectively moves one to another coin, which is not dishonest +(hostile to anyone). Miners have zero technical or ethical obligation +to follow any particular set of rules. Bitcoin has one golden rule, run +whatever code you want. Security is based on decentralization, not +well-behaved people (or well-behaved software). + +> This is true. But what we're talking about here is hostility to *a +> particular proposal to change the network rules* which is (in this +> hypothetical case) supported by the economic majority of users. This +> doesn't, in itself, break Bitcoin, although the economic majority are +> of course always free to hard-fork to something new if they're +> unhappy. + +Again spot on. Users of the money purchase security from miners. Miners +are under no obligation to provide that service nor are users under any +obligation to purchase it. + +One thing to consider is how different the landscape would look if every +person on the planet was a miner, and the economy was similarly +distributed. Would it be easier to get 51% hash power on board with a +soft fork, or some much higher percentage on board with a hard fork? It +seems likely that any proposed material change would fail. Regardless of +how one feels about that, it is the nature of a sound money that it +doesn't change. + +e + + +--0es2irxUKE31CaAQ2d8FMpNfHRQ7TxuHL +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" +Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature +Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- +Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) + +iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYvu/MAAoJEDzYwH8LXOFOMsAH/1ZEID79z3okKQhYeFRpAL4v +8g6KCnuye2FlwtXdQ3+i2aS5HNcYS+qaviBGo50DIFfou9uC//z0ffbzxdR2SonF +x/YL1xA0ZLsfONWdrkb/zZO8+zflUCh5eG/9P25W9t2YXr0g4ya64HWOHLOkw1/D +J0Pg9ph/Rm2allNVd0MT3ZMs9bK4qtbuRjergsNWYsg+Y/9t0ISdeoN0uN+Vhx0Z +gbAsQ8dN5le3NDVGYjVZ7jIEcYANQE/0nzMZtI2MUC8zvd36Tjno3jlLrxcx8xTH +2FkyvcIxn1G4uWLmIhzuQgdeV+sPyfKGt5EZb1w+iz9jXdiLf92FcAFID/gk7lM= +=00vX +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--0es2irxUKE31CaAQ2d8FMpNfHRQ7TxuHL-- + |