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
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
|
Return-Path: <cannon@cannon-ciota.info>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 426FE116D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 6 Feb 2018 02:10:18 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from forward1.bravehost.com (forward1.bravehost.com [65.39.211.65])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6CC634E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 6 Feb 2018 02:10:17 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at bravehost.com
Received: from [10.137.3.35] (tor-exit2.signal.center [84.19.181.25])
(Authenticated sender: cannon@cannon-ciota.info)
by forward1.bravehost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AF8971FF3;
Mon, 5 Feb 2018 18:10:07 -0800 (PST)
To: Damian Williamson <willtech@live.com.au>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
References: <6d24833d-f127-04ea-d180-c69409de16a5@cannon-ciota.info>
<6d92d8da-052d-f997-f441-0713acd72e85@cannon-ciota.info>
<PS2P216MB0179F59241705B69BC88CFEF9DFB0@PS2P216MB0179.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
From: CANNON <cannon@cannon-ciota.info>
Message-ID: <bccd08e1-8fe5-dca8-bb04-2d5a77c43005@cannon-ciota.info>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 02:08:24 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <PS2P216MB0179F59241705B69BC88CFEF9DFB0@PS2P216MB0179.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 07 Feb 2018 04:46:42 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] NIST 8202 Blockchain Technology Overview
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: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 02:10:18 -0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 01/31/2018 11:16 AM, Damian Williamson wrote:
> I disagree with the correctness of the following statement:
>
>
>> Rather than implementing the SegWit changes, the developers of Bitcoin Cash decided to simply increase the blocksize.
>
>
> I would suggest "Rather than being satisfied with the implementation of SegWit changes alone, the developers of
> Bitcoin Cash decided to also increase the blocksize.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Damian Williamson
You do realize that segwit includes many improvements of which are unrelated to scaling? These same improvements of which
simply increasing the blocksize alone would not fix or enable. Segwit is not just a blocksize increase.
Bitcoin Cash, while increasing the blocksize directly, from my understanding has yet to implement the
improvements and capabilities that segwit enables.
One example being, with transactions hashes being able to be calculated in advanced prior to signing
(due to the signature being in different section than that used
to calculate the transaction ID) it is possible to create transaction trees, enhanced smart contracts, trustless mixing protocols,
micropayment networks, etc...
Segwit also increases the security of signatures.
There are lots of other things segregated witness enables as well.
By saying "..segwit changes alone.... decided to also..." Bitcoin Cash has not implemented segwit. Bitcoin Cash only
increased the blocksize.
that wording above at least from the way I read it, seems to imply that Bitcoin Cash has segwit.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=+UCK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
