Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
	boundary="Apple-Mail=_F01198B8-B27B-4E3E-B1EF-69314A036841";
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
From: Jonathan Toomim <j@toom.im>
In-Reply-To: <777b112833eb55ae99af8cacaf0e3b5a@xbt.hk>
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 05:00:45 -0800
Message-Id: <39BC49BA-FE1B-41F3-A423-DB1106A2A508@toom.im>
References: <20151229053559.GA8657@muck>
	<26ec8367f2a1cda066b19e0bff498711@xbt.hk>
	<77DAE310-204C-4275-A791-4047798FCBFE@toom.im>
	<777b112833eb55ae99af8cacaf0e3b5a@xbt.hk>
To: jl2012 <jl2012@xbt.hk>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] We can trivially fix quadratic CHECKSIG with a
	simple soft-fork modifying just SignatureHash()
Precedence: list


--Apple-Mail=_F01198B8-B27B-4E3E-B1EF-69314A036841
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8

I suggest we use short-circuit evaluation. If someone complains, we =
figure it out as we go, maybe depending on the nature of the complaint. =
If nobody complains, we get it done faster.

We're humans. We have the ability to respond to novel conditions without =
relying on predetermined rules and algorithms. I suggest we use that =
ability sometimes.

On Dec 29, 2015, at 4:55 AM, jl2012 <jl2012@xbt.hk> wrote:

> What if someone complains? We can't even tell whether a complaint is =
legit or just trolling. That's why I think we need some general =
consensus rules which is not written in code, but as a social contract. =
Breaking those rules would be considered as a hardfork and is allowed =
only in exceptional situation.
>=20
> Jonathan Toomim via bitcoin-dev =E6=96=BC 2015-12-29 07:42 =E5=AF=AB=E5=88=
=B0:
>> That sounds like a rather unlikely scenario. Unless you have a
>> specific reason to suspect that might be the case, I think we don't
>> need to worry about it too much. If we announce the intention to
>> perform such a soft fork a couple of months before the soft fork
>> becomes active, and if nobody complains about it destroying their
>> secret stash, then I think that's fair enough and we could proceed.
>> On Dec 28, 2015, at 11:47 PM, jl2012 via bitcoin-dev
>> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>> Do we need to consider that someone may have a timelocked big tx, =
with private key lost?
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>=20


--Apple-Mail=_F01198B8-B27B-4E3E-B1EF-69314A036841
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org

iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWgoP+AAoJEIEuMk4MG0P1NM8IAK7RYkK8PYi9wM0rsT824XR0
ALM/MA8ztHmaiBH3OJ13DCPQeZZI3eK2J6W3n3cENhPvphx/pYK1+pURNjT+Cnqs
OOEJeZYnrWUPB1f4eW4kQqCY3R+KkacDtMXsa4H5MMcrM9IQc/tNErFnmHyun7su
VIQnq1hUWzR+/V5B+7+qAAEvDLwVLSSg9HVMhJ/DQuVLoM9AwaK9STdYYgSYGpD3
IeX9KzUj3iSzzSGd05ZyS/8Ha+vG7R2RrfKZUKWvvrH56rqziV+Gn9RJCihda9Fj
/WGBc4pcT/i83j3qUW4ELobC8+un+hff5fYTl9tyhTh+QRDQTkaupo9wUnor5z0=
=Vf2s
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_F01198B8-B27B-4E3E-B1EF-69314A036841--