MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <mailman.7.1665662404.16405.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
 <CAHTn92x8-20SjMRs=+vbtvbvocSUM9gVEmHkhuifXeApANFXfg@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y0l6mN5Qw20HSmg6@petertodd.org>
In-Reply-To: <Y0l6mN5Qw20HSmg6@petertodd.org>
From: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 12:28:49 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJowKg+xLFyLPXBHp4tTvceFMO8TG-O=Wq0hbpXKbqCYhZhtNg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>, 
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000088a95e05eb011f67"
Cc: John Carvalho <john@synonym.to>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Opt-in full-RBF] Zero-conf apps in immediate
	danger
Precedence: list

--00000000000088a95e05eb011f67
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Also, lightning works fine and is readily available in convenient mobile
apps used by millions of people, or in .   So the need for a 0conf has been
mitigated by other solutions for fast payments with no need for a trust
relationship.  And for people that don't like mobile risks, core lightning
and other solutions are now easily installed and configured for use in fast
payments.

some references:

https://muun.com/ (easy!)
https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning (reference, works well with
core)
https://lightning.network/ (more info)


On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 11:11 AM Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 12:03:21PM +0200, John Carvalho via bitcoin-dev
> wrote:
> > In support of Dario's concern, I feel like there is a degree of
> gaslighting
> > happening with the advancement of RBF somehow being okay, while merchants
> > wanting to manage their own 0conf risk better being not okay.
>
> The way merchants try to manage 0conf risk is quite harmful to Bitcoin.
> Connecting to large numbers of nodes to try to risk-manage propagation
> _is_ an
> attack, albeit a mild one. Everyone doing that is very harmful; only a few
> merchants being able to do it is very unfair/centralized.
>
> ...and of course, in the past this has lead to merchants trying to make
> deals
> with miners directly, even going as far as to suggest reorging out
> double-spends. I don't need to explain why that is obviously extremely
> harmful.
>
> --
> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>

--00000000000088a95e05eb011f67
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Also, lightning works fine and is readily available in con=
venient=C2=A0mobile apps used by millions of people, or in .=C2=A0 =C2=A0So=
 the need for a 0conf has been mitigated by other solutions for fast paymen=
ts with no need for a trust relationship.=C2=A0 And for people that don&#39=
;t like mobile risks, core lightning and other solutions are now easily ins=
talled and configured for use in fast payments.<br><br>some references:<div=
><br></div><div><div><a href=3D"https://muun.com/">https://muun.com/</a> (e=
asy!)</div></div><div><a href=3D"https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightni=
ng">https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning</a> (reference, works well=
 with core)<div><a href=3D"https://lightning.network/">https://lightning.ne=
twork/</a> (more info)</div></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class=3D"gm=
ail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 11=
:11 AM Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.l=
inuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br=
></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;=
border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Fri, Oct 14, 20=
22 at 12:03:21PM +0200, John Carvalho via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br>
&gt; In support of Dario&#39;s concern, I feel like there is a degree of ga=
slighting<br>
&gt; happening with the advancement of RBF somehow being okay, while mercha=
nts<br>
&gt; wanting to manage their own 0conf risk better being not okay.<br>
<br>
The way merchants try to manage 0conf risk is quite harmful to Bitcoin.<br>
Connecting to large numbers of nodes to try to risk-manage propagation _is_=
 an<br>
attack, albeit a mild one. Everyone doing that is very harmful; only a few<=
br>
merchants being able to do it is very unfair/centralized.<br>
<br>
...and of course, in the past this has lead to merchants trying to make dea=
ls<br>
with miners directly, even going as far as to suggest reorging out<br>
double-spends. I don&#39;t need to explain why that is obviously extremely =
harmful.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
<a href=3D"https://petertodd.org" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">http=
s://petertodd.org</a> &#39;peter&#39;[:-1]@<a href=3D"http://petertodd.org"=
 rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">petertodd.org</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>

--00000000000088a95e05eb011f67--