path: root/64/0005269fa3acd910f4f935b87ab8198834c79b

Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B929BC002C
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Fri,  8 Apr 2022 09:59:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5043410F7
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Fri,  8 Apr 2022 09:59:01 +0000 (UTC)
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
Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
 dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=jtimon-cc.20210112.gappssmtp.com
Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id 6Kj8NtpI9Rfq
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Fri,  8 Apr 2022 09:59:00 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-yb1-xb32.google.com (mail-yb1-xb32.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b32])
 by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF66D4012F
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Fri,  8 Apr 2022 09:59:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb32.google.com with SMTP id l36so14140961ybj.12
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Fri, 08 Apr 2022 02:59:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=jtimon-cc.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112;
 h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :cc; bh=l67hmDgWA0OVFw6kuFJa5NZHlubUfDTCRAzmvrfrFm8=;
 b=DgvzibQwmt93PxxuzKGXbIkkzUi/8J+JwRNdWL8+i4G1P9IS1xegS9mO0Me9FM7ltj
 a3WJbaKXvC6++6UCBg9I4DlL1b6L9qaQoCoXx/Vi/iAN3ephqk7aghz8nBQvdP78n+vA
 yPpdawaLC0pGs7R8voNmJeiur/SwzKDrBJoEPNZ6Z2xG5vcbOJQw9bY1TjXMEJea6rvy
 KpeORYjAhabfWLVtXDTAfZsVvTijjxugz/KYfv+lElu0rY3HFVzGjHPXq9zR2UtZT+pW
 Yd8NtrS2DhHNWNajfxQQ4fHfvuo+JZE+YnDpse7TVbuwT3wvMnLiNUqaeBvoTiAVXavg
 uU5w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=l67hmDgWA0OVFw6kuFJa5NZHlubUfDTCRAzmvrfrFm8=;
 b=gTAPpT/oVO/3kMNdfH9wLmK30WUSV/jMcrl3EEJG0HYy6c6kUR6V1kiHqqLt+O6ImO
 jDYiebHbaOeiRUCkJlOQe2d0WwfKjaGqBzEuNqn9qVmK2KGpeL+mqMmYih/JWThetGM0
 M3+kLtNim37BrM+KcEjJEp3TbcZ85j1V8YnjfsK/1+t0AIHIuqJPgvftnfjTr+32ek1F
 WWu3Ur+vvQeTrfOt6BBIii3E1iDGYlgK/+y7AFhA3sLvUIXGxYhaoCLie2J+j+kHLnjc
 gejpBQGPVZKPu/hiqw++yrRg0X+1hm5MAO+nl9huqSaT2SxN8CeDObjDbVxP4XqPwCOc
 I5MQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532lG0vWLcgpEnHcF3oqq/ipTP4HQEUX1YNxUi0HCXvt/BmqxNV8
 aEdnkW96IeBywwsBdskJrVZSlU8x+Bakc/fSwKHcjXvI6kmTkg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw5HcEnF9aHVrvYnFCM/CHzBR/xlAX/BdDBkvSQnJUYbnNsiH0vtbUI/s0lNCz/qtHRvCJZL3S7lpTtlsdDgKE=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:db54:0:b0:63d:c89a:52f8 with SMTP id
 g81-20020a25db54000000b0063dc89a52f8mr13535295ybf.620.1649411939596; Fri, 08
 Apr 2022 02:58:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMZUoKkTDjDSgnqhYio8Lnh-yTdsNAdXbDC9RQwnN00RdbbL6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABm2gDrdoD3QZ=gZ_nd7Q+AZpetX32dLON7pfdC4aAwpLRd4xA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMZUoK=kpZZw++WmdRM0KTkj6dQhmtsanm9eH1TksNwypKS8Zw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABm2gDpFFg47Ld3HHhTq2SVTaCusm1ybDpEmvKV=S3cFTAQwoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220315154549.GA7580@erisian.com.au>
 <CABm2gDpK8eRx3ATbxkF5ic1usUdT4vKiPJyjmPVc-HEOGkxm-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220322234951.GB11179@erisian.com.au>
 <CABm2gDoC5Y=o6Vu7urzBoioVmXBf+YBLg95w-kupx9nidRDBPg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220326014546.GA12225@erisian.com.au>
 <CABm2gDpMxN0sBCpcbmvYsQbdsGp=JRjAyLhsd6BWyAxdCY95+A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220330042106.GA13161@erisian.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <20220330042106.GA13161@erisian.com.au>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2022 11:58:48 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDrsZ9ZimFTkNrdj+wr7328h2N2GmRCawq8xYv3BqyHNow@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bf8e5905dc21a497"
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 08 Apr 2022 10:08:52 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Speedy Trial
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: Fri, 08 Apr 2022 09:59:01 -0000

--000000000000bf8e5905dc21a497
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 6:21 AM Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 09:31:18AM +0100, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin-de=
v
> wrote:
> > > In particular, any approach that allows you to block an evil fork,
> > > even when everyone else doesn't agree that it's evil, would also allo=
w
> > > an enemy of bitcoin to block a good fork, that everyone else correctl=
y
> > > recognises is good. A solution that works for an implausible
> hypothetical
> > > and breaks when a single attacker decides to take advantage of it is
> > > not a good design.
> > Let's discuss those too. Feel free to point out how bip8 fails at some
> > hypothetical cases speedy trial doesn't.
>
> Any case where a flawed proposal makes it through getting activation
> parameters set and released, but doesn't achieve supermajority hashpower
> support is made worse by bip8/lot=3Dtrue in comparison to speedy trial
>

I disagree. Also, again, not the hypothetical case I want to discuss.


> That's true both because of the "trial" part, in that activation can fail
> and you can go back to the drawing board without having to get everyone
> upgrade a second time, and also the "speedy" part, in that you don't
> have to wait a year or more before you even know what's going to happen.
>
> > >  0') someone has come up with a good idea (yay!)
> > >  1') most of bitcoin is enthusiastically behind the idea
> > >  2') an enemy of bitcoin is essentially alone in trying to stop it
> > >  3') almost everyone remains enthusiastic, despite that guy's
> incoherent
> > >      raving
> > >  4') nevertheless, the enemies of bitcoin should have the power to st=
op
> > >      the good idea
> > "That guy's incoherent raving"
> > "I'm just disagreeing".
>
> Uh, you realise the above is an alternative hypothetical, and not talking
> about you? I would have thought "that guy" being "an enemy of bitcoin"
> made that obvious... I think you're mistaken; I don't think your emails
> are incoherent ravings.
>

Do you realize IT IS NOT the hypothetical case I wanted to discuss. Seems
like that hypothetical case where a crazy person can be safely ignored
covered already.


> It was intended to be the simplest possible case of where someone being
> able to block a change is undesirable: they're motivated by trying to
> harm bitcoin, they're as far as possible from being part of some economic
> majority, and they don't even have a coherent rationale to provide for
> blocking the idea.
>
> Cheers,
> aj
>

Either I'm explaining my self very badly, you don't want to understand me,
or you can't understand me for whatever reason.
I don't feel listened or that "my concerns have been addressed", but at
this point  I feel we're wasting each others time.Perhaps my rational
against speedy trial is not coherent, or perhaps you haven't understand it
yet.
I'm sorry, but I'm tired of trying to explain. and quite, honestly, you
don't seem interested in listening to me and understanding me at all, but
only in "addressing my concerns". Obviously we understand different things
by "addressing concerns".
Perhaps it's the language barrier or something.

Good bye.

--000000000000bf8e5905dc21a497
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
<div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 6:21 AM Antho=
ny Towns &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:aj@erisian.com.au">aj@erisian.com.au</a>&gt;=
 wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px =
0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Mon, =
Mar 28, 2022 at 09:31:18AM +0100, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin-dev wrote:<b=
r>
&gt; &gt; In particular, any approach that allows you to block an evil fork=
,<br>
&gt; &gt; even when everyone else doesn&#39;t agree that it&#39;s evil, wou=
ld also allow<br>
&gt; &gt; an enemy of bitcoin to block a good fork, that everyone else corr=
ectly<br>
&gt; &gt; recognises is good. A solution that works for an implausible hypo=
thetical<br>
&gt; &gt; and breaks when a single attacker decides to take advantage of it=
 is<br>
&gt; &gt; not a good design.<br>
&gt; Let&#39;s discuss those too. Feel free to point out how bip8 fails at =
some<br>
&gt; hypothetical cases speedy trial doesn&#39;t.<br>
<br>
Any case where a flawed proposal makes it through getting activation<br>
parameters set and released, but doesn&#39;t achieve supermajority hashpowe=
r<br>
support is made worse by bip8/lot=3Dtrue in comparison to speedy trial<br><=
/blockquote><div><br></div><div>I disagree. Also, again, not the hypothetic=
al case I want to discuss.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"g=
mail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204=
,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
That&#39;s true both because of the &quot;trial&quot; part, in that activat=
ion can fail<br>
and you can go back to the drawing board without having to get everyone<br>
upgrade a second time, and also the &quot;speedy&quot; part, in that you do=
n&#39;t<br>
have to wait a year or more before you even know what&#39;s going to happen=
.<br>
<br>
&gt; &gt;=C2=A0 0&#39;) someone has come up with a good idea (yay!)<br>
&gt; &gt;=C2=A0 1&#39;) most of bitcoin is enthusiastically behind the idea=
<br>
&gt; &gt;=C2=A0 2&#39;) an enemy of bitcoin is essentially alone in trying =
to stop it<br>
&gt; &gt;=C2=A0 3&#39;) almost everyone remains enthusiastic, despite that =
guy&#39;s incoherent<br>
&gt; &gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 raving<br>
&gt; &gt;=C2=A0 4&#39;) nevertheless, the enemies of bitcoin should have th=
e power to stop<br>
&gt; &gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the good idea<br>
&gt; &quot;That guy&#39;s incoherent raving&quot;<br>
&gt; &quot;I&#39;m just disagreeing&quot;.<br>
<br>
Uh, you realise the above is an alternative hypothetical, and not talking<b=
r>
about you? I would have thought &quot;that guy&quot; being &quot;an enemy o=
f bitcoin&quot;<br>
made that obvious... I think you&#39;re mistaken; I don&#39;t think your em=
ails<br>
are incoherent ravings.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Do you realize =
IT IS NOT the hypothetical case I wanted to discuss. Seems like that hypoth=
etical case where a crazy person can be safely ignored covered already.<br>=
</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0p=
x 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
It was intended to be the simplest possible case of where someone being<br>
able to block a change is undesirable: they&#39;re motivated by trying to<b=
r>
harm bitcoin, they&#39;re as far as possible from being part of some econom=
ic<br>
majority, and they don&#39;t even have a coherent rationale to provide for<=
br>
blocking the idea.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
aj<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Either I&#39;m explaining my self ve=
ry badly, you don&#39;t want to understand me, or you can&#39;t understand =
me for whatever reason.</div><div>I don&#39;t feel listened or that &quot;m=
y concerns have been addressed&quot;, but at this point=C2=A0 I feel we&#39=
;re wasting each others time.Perhaps my rational against speedy trial is no=
t coherent, or perhaps you haven&#39;t understand it yet.</div><div>I&#39;m=
 sorry, but I&#39;m tired of trying to explain. and quite, honestly, you do=
n&#39;t seem interested in listening to me and understanding me at all, but=
 only in &quot;addressing my concerns&quot;. Obviously we understand differ=
ent things by &quot;addressing concerns&quot;.<br></div><div>Perhaps it&#39=
;s the language barrier or something.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Good bye=
.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div>

--000000000000bf8e5905dc21a497--