Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1RELUy-0001WK-0P for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:39:00 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([173.242.112.54]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1RELUx-0003uq-89 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:38:59 +0000 Received: from ishibashi.localnet (fl-184-4-160-40.dhcp.embarqhsd.net [184.4.160.40]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA9332040B2 for ; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:38:53 +0000 (UTC) From: "Luke-Jr" To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 09:38:32 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/2.6.39-gentoo; KDE/4.6.5; x86_64; ; ) References: In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: CE5A D56A 36CC 69FA E7D2 3558 665F C11D D53E 9583 X-PGP-Key-ID: 665FC11DD53E9583 X-PGP-Keyserver: x-hkp://subkeys.pgp.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <201110130938.35014.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.5 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1RELUx-0003uq-89 Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] State of Bitcoin Development: October Brain Dump X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:39:00 -0000 On Thursday, October 13, 2011 9:32:48 AM Gavin Andresen wrote: > =95 Tighten up block-time rules to fix the potential "timejacking" attack. Once again, this does not fix anything (they're already strict enough for t= he=20 2-week window), and just creates new problems. > =95 Work on 'discouraging' blocks/transactions to punish > bad-for-the-common-good-but-good-for-me behaviors from miners or > nodes. =46lawed concept. Only even potentially useful for extreme cases (ie, a min= er=20 intentionally making lots of 1 MB blocks of junk).