Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2239FC000E for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 18:11:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3B0183BD6 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 18:11:09 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.895 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CjK_tYM-9irT for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 18:11:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail-pf1-x430.google.com (mail-pf1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::430]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A17C183BC6 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 18:11:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf1-x430.google.com with SMTP id i6so3280531pfq.1 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:11:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=tXWbsr+k9ujlLkcYKRhDXJw13+OpJ3L1CAsx7xeT9Gk=; b=J/9jZLmWMeSUvhap+C7ULMekOLpp3kQO6BpYU5PxAW+PQycRRdpMDZIPpX69dneh2s itBNEYrsPpeqpmezJY3u6Z/6tcs3iGq6dWIsw8KQh/GGMYrpKGb2XbfK4LCpJHgKArhd SsscFD4uFCOOji/PYAX9tK3USQgcrllbttiUvndWJf/WYY7+WAxShBQtXTpT1byxfDLr TQNgWV3ToqrP2hUevbCOi84l0eulzASp2w5q1cSFyHN1+TDZSZXg5L2O1KloZNknfQtk UW3B9E0S8o47vORFrQOUsQvqKLefiMZFZwcyo7Q67Z5orqq38ipAsLZxh0ikCJKkxvU0 fWgw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=tXWbsr+k9ujlLkcYKRhDXJw13+OpJ3L1CAsx7xeT9Gk=; b=ZDkOxMAGwQbdH1/hDIDIWDdBCg0RB1ATWc1ULO33PIRItumHKi3p+WJOs+U8VqvWmN D2Pnvnz1CVG3hYDuLGOhPpX0SDiA0hTiQliC4yACGTFcxTDx4l9Td6Jek2lD5DWYnG1o DYpQhUA/Y0cXz3gpsxPtayCM7cazt175tUsRObsIt4qMEh9BhnyUZI2r4yfmdlXANSkN 8//GNuMdKBtXdpMYHD5nOkFoancrNBvVPqprV5+iYqTgJ3rjgxpZVimrd1WLti/0VN5K rLpXJXygfrDHbkPgFqKJZfetiYgL1HsZSRY6V7V7qmchq8mOD9xFEuzvYiAZjXvdCnom IteA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5336ve8CqPcW+/zwgHA76BnseWyQJJPz/cvuRcI2+yLvzoeuqnHi ozsbQKyBGZkryW5KtVqc8csQGw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyqZMf0u4z83Lkh/kodvbaE1JxqD6eX5QpXnypJ+SqCfFeyp8PFNDwyGaFJnhXdSlspJ4Cjnw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:13a7:b029:309:bfd1:a3f5 with SMTP id t39-20020a056a0013a7b0290309bfd1a3f5mr27456144pfg.66.1625076667905; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:11:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2601:600:9c00:1d0::da55]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b19sm22475570pjh.29.2021.06.30.11.11.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:11:07 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-EA8E19DD-BF85-410B-A4BB-89CE8511D16F Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Eric Voskuil Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:11:06 -0700 Message-Id: <45EF3F33-E707-4EE7-B02A-AD8A93474B92@voskuil.org> References: In-Reply-To: To: Zac Greenwood X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18F72) Cc: Prayank , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Trinary Version Signaling for softfork X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 18:11:10 -0000 --Apple-Mail-EA8E19DD-BF85-410B-A4BB-89CE8511D16F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On Jun 30, 2021, at 05:45, Zac Greenwood wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BF > Eric, >=20 > > A million nodes saying a transaction is invalid does nothing to enforce t= hat knowledge >=20 > It does. Nodes disregard invalid transactions and invalid blocks as if the= y never existed. It is not possible for any party to transact bitcoin in a w= ay that violates the set of rules enforced by the network of consensus-compa= tible nodes that we call Bitcoin. When Fincen walks into Coinbase and every other exchange (and white market b= usiness in the country), and tells them to change a rule or they are taking t= he CEO out in hancuffs for money laundering, I=E2=80=99m pretty sure that th= eir node with not be able to prevent it. Enforcement is always people. We use the term node as a metaphorical term fo= r people who use the node to avoid taking bad money. Like those machines tha= t test paper money, they offer no resistance themselves. A node in a closet checking transactions, unconnected to any human actually r= ejecting the money in trade, offers no resistance to anything. It can be for= ked off without any consequence whatsoever.=20 This subject was discussed here during the BCH split. People were setting up= nodes on cloud services, to boost numbers. These non-economic nodes were of= course of no consequence, which was not a matter of debate. I=E2=80=99m exp= laining to you why that is. The network ignores non-economic nodes as if they never existed. > Zac >=20 >=20 >> On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 2:03 PM Eric Voskuil wrote: >> A million nodes saying a transaction is invalid does nothing to enforce t= hat knowledge. >>=20 >> An economic node is a person who refuses to accept invalid money. A node o= nly informs this decision, it cannot enforce it. That=E2=80=99s up to people= . >>=20 >> And clearly if one is not actually accepting bitcoin for anything at the t= ime, he is not enforcing anything. >>=20 >> The idea of a non-economic node is well established, nothing new here. >>=20 >> e >>=20 >>>> On Jun 30, 2021, at 04:33, Zac Greenwood wrote: >>>>=20 >>> =EF=BB=BF >>> Hi Eric, >>>=20 >>> > A node (software) doesn=E2=80=99t enforce anything. Merchants enforce c= onsensus rules >>>=20 >>> =E2=80=A6 by running a node which they believe to enforce the rules of B= itcoin. >>>=20 >>> A node definitely enforces consensus rules and defines what is Bitcoin. I= am quite disturbed that this is even being debated here. >>>=20 >>> Zac --Apple-Mail-EA8E19DD-BF85-410B-A4BB-89CE8511D16F Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Jun 30, 2021, at 05:45, Zac Greenwood <= zachgrw@gmail.com> wrote:

=EF=BB=BF
Eric,

>= ; A million nodes saying a transaction is invalid does nothing to enforce th= at knowledge

It does. Nodes disregard invalid trans= actions and invalid blocks as if they never existed. It is not possible for a= ny party to transact bitcoin in a way that violates the set of rules enforce= d by the network of consensus-compatible nodes that we call Bitcoin.

When Fincen walks into Coinbase a= nd every other exchange (and white market business in the country), and tell= s them to change a rule or they are taking the CEO out in hancuffs for money= laundering, I=E2=80=99m pretty sure that their node with not be able to pre= vent it.

Enforcement is always people. We use the t= erm node as a metaphorical term for people who use the node to avoid taking b= ad money. Like those machines that test paper money, they offer no resistanc= e themselves.

A node in a closet checking transacti= ons, unconnected to any human actually rejecting the money in trade, offers n= o resistance to anything. It can be forked off without any consequence whats= oever. 

This subject was discussed here during= the BCH split. People were setting up nodes on cloud services, to boost num= bers. These non-economic nodes were of course of no consequence, which was n= ot a matter of debate. I=E2=80=99m explaining to you why that is.
=
The network ignores non-economic nodes as if they never exist= ed.

Zac


On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 2:03 P= M Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org&= gt; wrote:
A million nodes saying a transaction is invalid d= oes nothing to enforce that knowledge.

An economic node is a person who refuses to accept invalid money.= A node only informs this decision, it cannot enforce it. That=E2=80=99s up t= o people.

And clearly if on= e is not actually accepting bitcoin for anything at the time, he is not enfo= rcing anything.

The idea of= a non-economic node is well established, nothing new here.

e

On Jun 30, 2021, at 04:33, Zac Greenwood <zachgrw@gmail.com> wrote:

<= /blockquote>
=EF=BB=BF
Hi Eric,

> A node (software) d= oesn=E2=80=99t enforce anything. Merchants enforce consensus rules

=E2=80=A6 by running a node which th= ey believe to enforce the rules of Bitcoin.

A node definitely enforces consensus rules and defines what is B= itcoin. I am quite disturbed that this is even being debated here.

<= /span>
Zac
= --Apple-Mail-EA8E19DD-BF85-410B-A4BB-89CE8511D16F--