MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: gmaxwell@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CADvTj4rpGTJ59bg0JF2qOo8+f+jku=5zFZWX=uJ-eMhHjqhMcw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAS2fgRdSOu8N6L3+fBpnye+rM+W6+F=cePy=9oL4tJuCj=Jsw@mail.gmail.com>
	<2983024.JOGDlViq2a@cherry>
	<CADvTj4qjCvN_kPV8YBz0f94YD2Ur4PWqryFPeKQ42fx_Wj2hTQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<2003939.Nx7GrYTPuJ@cherry>
	<CADvTj4rpGTJ59bg0JF2qOo8+f+jku=5zFZWX=uJ-eMhHjqhMcw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2017 21:12:47 +0000
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgTzMs+GnwOOeUFVT61b5FjEvR4VwJk-MABQuvrgUM+t1g@mail.gmail.com>
To: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] I do not support the BIP 148 UASF
Precedence: list

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:10 PM, James Hilliard via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> would have to intentionally modify the code to mine an invalid block
> which is not something that would be likely to happen accidentally.

IIRC-- If you do it accidentally you'll fail the tests, though there
have been a couple reckless alternative implementations that have just
ripped out most of the tests...

In any case there is no need to speculate or guess-- invalid segwit
spends are not being mined today...