path: root/32/e68100733e93ee6adc03cd8ee6d6dbc475b139

Return-Path: <john@synonym.to>
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F5F9C002D
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat, 15 Oct 2022 04:21:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE88760BAD
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat, 15 Oct 2022 04:21:08 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org DE88760BAD
Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org;
 dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=synonym-to.20210112.gappssmtp.com
 header.i=@synonym-to.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.a=rsa-sha256
 header.s=20210112 header.b=OjpmmhP/
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
 SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id uW7-YRqLyeTY
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat, 15 Oct 2022 04:21:07 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 87E9460BDB
Received: from mail-qt1-x833.google.com (mail-qt1-x833.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::833])
 by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87E9460BDB
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat, 15 Oct 2022 04:21:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qt1-x833.google.com with SMTP id g11so4913654qts.1
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Fri, 14 Oct 2022 21:21:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=synonym-to.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112;
 h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version
 :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
 bh=zPrc1ZzCH/ukrCySX19vr24yUvPqrTf/UFIaAaS/gqM=;
 b=OjpmmhP/oYq5if7LeLqnCzirFZDnhc7uE5cZZ7vihVt8iabP29CpAUaONpiDHkmIMl
 3d2y8P4r2bttNTPYPUHJ1fYmyx02y3mCUHg63wHH17SVQ20t4z8SEJnVWX2DB148ROJz
 jqeg+FDnKtrJr7JBpirEN2jZmSJElKPwg62FugD+kypC4btOZ4V7f1627PSzS/7HwVEl
 S3u4WIsVNd8aRxXNWZSCEfdIfQmjIWuVCct6nGMMaRBB4zCH0jmTnzRv2gGFZ6khMiyT
 cZuGG+ML/0a9iSFoba5DFz3WGi7b3cciRzc0+0T1vyouqn9fbAZqYct/yAi5ulhX3yvq
 ZE7Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
 h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version
 :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
 bh=zPrc1ZzCH/ukrCySX19vr24yUvPqrTf/UFIaAaS/gqM=;
 b=jQu8x1tGvgE2xbX1raZsVSaP5igHIv+Ys5Vy5n0jwEbHH3IG+ahYhS2nSatsaJ5ysa
 e9ctEj6uyll8gbuhaKB38AVRjF/QytgLtBHQnxjauaQsampXfAZz1MwZCQsJeAWALw8I
 GkRaZlmgL865d7/ja37MBwMtjRhaWZIBEWAHfDYfIbzyLKd9klLA2lHZZpbpxlXcb4lJ
 tbEmfd5Xcxa/jgWF8yX7Yc5RQbNQmmsQc7FcL7S4vqXDCbXoI9qqdq/U3N2+3HFCmkzG
 5y+AfcamZsNnKuPK8FyrYRtoMm6uwpb49sR9taQeB+BhED3LJfUQ+kF8lxpYvy8hCUVX
 E8HA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf2YASfiDMS6VOvfhENmO2ABNKuW3FXnFESS/Mng+29d7LtCfvD/
 c5FysLDvzFoCox+bHva+sWSZ/dsCFGMXTaQjuI2TaMqMq5ipcg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM67Csyd/y2XsT35Myi4fg66cjAYFWb+CLDpDncv98xN7B1QumlKyDvHy8GorblZYJq7oJsYo8Y1988i9SSvBBo=
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:594d:0:b0:35c:ba75:c1dc with SMTP id
 13-20020ac8594d000000b0035cba75c1dcmr726146qtz.286.1665807666106; Fri, 14 Oct
 2022 21:21:06 -0700 (PDT)
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: John Carvalho <john@synonym.to>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 06:20:55 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHTn92ywRppgBqHWyb-SvNWa=gpmCj6Xupsr37vEMvfwru4X5w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
 Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000033e39605eb0b1292"
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 14:36:44 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Opt-in full-RBF] Zero-conf apps in immediate
	danger
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, 
 <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, 
 <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 04:21:09 -0000

--00000000000033e39605eb0b1292
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Peter,

Your argument is totally hypocritical and loses when comparing quantities.

Enforcing RBF is observably more "harmful to Bitcoin" (whatever that
means...) when it tries to "risk-manage propagation" of replacements, as
there more Bitcoiners that want to mutually utilize 0conf than users that
want to replace transactions.

Spending bitcoin is a use case, so replacing txns reduces utility and makes
commitments less certain.

No one here arguing for 0conf is suggesting reorgs, so please do not
sensationalize with claims of reorgs or "harm."

Take note that it is RBF proponents that have changed Bitcoin code and seek
to continue to change Bitcoin, RBF that seeks to reduce commercial utility
-- but 0conf proponents are not asking for changes to Bitcoin, not
suggesting soft or hard forks, etc. We are asking you to stop breaking
things by adding features for minority speculative interests.

-John

On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 5:04 PM Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.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
>
-- 
--
John Carvalho
CEO, Synonym.to <http://synonym.to/>

Schedule: https://calendly.com/bitcoinerrorlog
Chat: https://t.me/bitcoinerrorlog
Social: https://twitter.com/bitcoinerrorlog

--00000000000033e39605eb0b1292
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"auto">Peter,</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto"=
>Your argument is totally hypocritical and loses when comparing quantities.=
=C2=A0</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Enforcing RBF is =
observably more &quot;harmful to Bitcoin&quot; (whatever that means...) whe=
n it tries to &quot;risk-manage propagation&quot; of replacements, as there=
 more Bitcoiners that want to mutually utilize 0conf than users that want t=
o replace transactions.=C2=A0</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"=
auto">Spending bitcoin is a use case, so replacing txns reduces utility and=
 makes commitments less certain.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=
=3D"auto">No one here arguing for 0conf is suggesting reorgs, so please do =
not sensationalize with claims of reorgs or &quot;harm.&quot;</div><div dir=
=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Take note that it is RBF proponents t=
hat have changed Bitcoin code and seek to continue to change Bitcoin, RBF t=
hat seeks to reduce commercial utility -- but 0conf proponents are not aski=
ng for changes to Bitcoin, not suggesting soft or hard forks, etc. We are a=
sking you to stop breaking things by adding features for minority speculati=
ve interests.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">-John=C2=
=A0</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote" dir=3D"auto"><div=
 dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 5:04 PM Peter Tod=
d &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:pete@petertodd.org">pete@petertodd.org</a>&gt; wrot=
e:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0=
.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-=
left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 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>
</blockquote></div></div>-- <br><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_signature" =
data-smartmail=3D"gmail_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr"><span style=3D"color:rg=
b(34,34,34)">--</span><br style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34)"><div dir=3D"ltr" st=
yle=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34)"><div dir=3D"ltr">John Carvalho</div><div dir=3D=
"ltr">CEO,=C2=A0<a href=3D"http://synonym.to/" style=3D"color:rgb(17,85,204=
)" target=3D"_blank">Synonym.to</a><br><div><font size=3D"1"><br>Schedule:=
=C2=A0<a href=3D"https://calendly.com/bitcoinerrorlog" style=3D"color:rgb(1=
7,85,204)" target=3D"_blank">https://calendly.com/bitcoinerrorlog</a><br></=
font></div><div><font size=3D"1">Chat:=C2=A0<a href=3D"https://t.me/bitcoin=
errorlog" style=3D"color:rgb(17,85,204)" target=3D"_blank">https://t.me/bit=
coinerrorlog</a></font></div><div><font size=3D"1">Social:=C2=A0<a href=3D"=
https://twitter.com/bitcoinerrorlog" style=3D"color:rgb(17,85,204)" target=
=3D"_blank">https://twitter.com/bitcoinerrorlog</a></font></div></div></div=
></div></div>

--00000000000033e39605eb0b1292--