1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
|
Return-Path: <apoelstra@wpsoftware.net>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AC1E900
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 16 Sep 2017 01:51:14 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: delayed 00:08:19 by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail.wpsoftware.net (wpsoftware.net [96.53.77.134])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF2FC47C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 16 Sep 2017 01:51:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from boulet (boulot.lan [192.168.0.193])
by mail.wpsoftware.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9FC49400E2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 16 Sep 2017 01:42:53 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2017 01:42:53 +0000
From: Andrew Poelstra <apoelstra@wpsoftware.net>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <20170916014252.GN24183@boulet>
References: <9e212eae-08d5-d083-80d9-a8e29679fcdc@osc.co.cr>
<SU02clg--S4TtIK4TZIytgdnHE8SzXBwSEb_FN5edtPAaojLwCEd6OTNkBUrDiH1FwHPuD4D5yByE7r4Fz_-CVzzU9KK0xvmDGlWNxTp3aU=@protonmail.com>
<9a541ba8-7c25-fdbb-505f-6426f61bdc63@osc.co.cr>
<0c98e067-dff3-988b-af66-7c624de3eef4@chainside.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="E5y/n5ezzB8hoLvW"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0c98e067-dff3-988b-af66-7c624de3eef4@chainside.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04)
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RP_MATCHES_RCVD
autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] hypothetical: Could soft-forks be prevented?
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 16 Sep 2017 01:51:14 -0000
--E5y/n5ezzB8hoLvW
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:40:12PM +0200, Simone Bronzini via bitcoin-dev w=
rote:
> Since a soft-fork is a restriction of the consensus rules, I think the
> only way to have an un-soft-forkable cryptocurrency is creating a
> cryptocurrency where no transaction is valid.
>=20
Even this can be soft-forked to add an extension block that contains transa=
ctions :)
Ultimately I think the best you can do in this direction is to design for
maximal fungibility and/or transaction structures that minimize interaction
with the blockchain. This minimizes the surface for transaction censorship,
which is somewhat in the spirit of your goal.
--=20
Andrew Poelstra
Mathematics Department, Blockstream
Email: apoelstra at wpsoftware.net
Web: https://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew
"A goose alone, I suppose, can know the loneliness of geese
who can never find their peace,
whether north or south or west or east"
--Joanna Newsom
--E5y/n5ezzB8hoLvW
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJZvIGcAAoJEMWI1jzkG5fBT9QIAIzzp0EPzggX3Q0/ebsiBcWy
izKdgjOZw9FcSDrTpdpcurpsaeTWOj5phrnIJfcdZot4HSlHaQAy1UX0e53vfJ7U
CLE84DpLd4oB5B5bMx+sQpNbYIT1oJOoMu7nopZzmGvJVqYxHfWERdZY1rdhlefh
IZYbvvl7LEoWrFgd1BXeeOgTIMJyh6T/UdLGGppTjDsL8UePSXg93Aa6Ve+yGYoB
CEejk7p+7bPn4/zQBHLmv7xvDajzewF/HOcYiX99YUwDwsE676mG9GFInrFiLGj/
ov22oMm49xob+YZh5svmOoPJBAT7twl/MQO+hWoc47Y4Io7QrdAO0rbRw/7UXYI=
=GoeU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--E5y/n5ezzB8hoLvW--
|
