Return-Path: Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40510C0001 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 20:48:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FD7A4AB68 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 20:48:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=riseup.net Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JPLHo0FsQxPx for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 20:48:22 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mx1.riseup.net (mx1.riseup.net [198.252.153.129]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D87349E7A for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 20:48:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fews2.riseup.net (fews2-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.84]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "Sectigo RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (not verified)) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DrR0j5XlXzDqB9; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 12:48:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1614804501; bh=X3CBbowzVMOzdDutgdBvKJk3+yTu5KbxsEmgZLd1Myg=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=jQPmX1MeBqILg4LmjOXO91kIvJrK8SeT32OJ+JSjCbPFoV/nseX72/XZSkXXK5vbD 6m/8tgtD2xdKvDQFyblFsGNRdfUfNbVMuP3pPuMrGbBpi9KPWu0R8bnlLERBHkBdm8 hOoBe0ndTNfuWoqndfZMkWFlJdUvpmgCU+9EchXo= X-Riseup-User-ID: A17E486BC0308DC98215313B0BF1675317B7D0ACC98D666B91F8D5FAC57DD7A0 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fews2.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4DrR0j0Gkyz1y6Q; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 12:48:20 -0800 (PST) To: yanmaani@cock.li, Bitcoin Protocol Discussion References: <3286a7eb-9deb-77d6-4527-58e0c5882ae2@riseup.net> <85745a38e4464541d6357408fae1cfed@cock.li> From: Chris Belcher Autocrypt: addr=belcher@riseup.net; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsFNBFPk74oBEACzBLjd+Z5z7eimqPuObFTaJCTXP7fgZjgVwt+q94VQ2wM0ctk/Ft9w2A92 f14T7PiHaVDjHxrcW+6sw2VI2f60T8Tjf+b4701hIybluWL8DntG9BW19bZLmjAj7zkgektl YNDUrlYcQq2OEHm/MGk6Ajt2RA56aRKqoz22e+4ZA89gDgamxUAadul7AETSsgqOEUDI0FKR FODzoH65w1ien/DLkG1f76jd0XA6AxrESJVO0JzvkTnJGElBcA37rYaMmDi4DhG2MY4u63VE 8h6DyUXcRhmTZIAj+r+Ht+KMDiuiyQcKywCzzF/7Ui7YxqeAgjm5aPDU2E8X9Qd7cqHQzFM7 ZCqc9P6ENAk5a0JjHw0d0knApboSvkIJUB0j1xDIS0HaRlfHM4TPdOoDgnaXb7BvDfE+0zSz WkvAns9oJV6uWdnz5kllVCjgB/FXO4plyFCHhXikXjm1XuQyL8xV88OqgDFXwVhKrDL9Pknu sTchYm3BS2b5Xq1HQqToT3I2gRGTtDzZVZV0izCefJaDp1mf49k2cokDEfw9MroEj4A0Wfht 0J64pzlBYn/9zor5cZp/EAblLRDK6HKhSZArIiDR1RC7a6s7oTzmfn0suhKDdTzkbTAnDsPi Dokl58xoxz+JdYKjzVh98lpcvMPlbZ+LwIsgbdH4KZj7mVOsJwARAQABzR9DaHJpcyBCZWxj aGVyIDxmYWxzZUBlbWFpbC5jb20+wsF+BBMBAgAoBQJT5O+KAhsDBQkSzAMABgsJCAcDAgYV CAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAAKCRDvc06md/MRKS8jD/9P9fSYSIVjltL9brAMfIu7wJn0H0lX TbcuCM2uQitJ3BNxI3c7aq5dEby27u5Ud54otncDJuRPQVDKs6H7t1rInitgJ1MTQ9/aQGFA btKcgtVIMFbeClzTTfWr4W7fE45NI7E9EANgk5JfmWh3U+KINYLF5RtqynYocrsP6zOV+G9A HCpBemd9TN60CoMLMyMzTHEW1oQffaVAXY8DgthEYO/odWYIod7VTmEm0zU1aSysPqMwPWNm 8XIl0f8SfKQyZlAU8e1eCFVCenkE44FKC5qQNYc2UxexEYtfCWChTGc4oHKxIyYmTCCefsQF LvgwtvlNHRXHSDKSPSNcRcpl8DFpNEKrmMlkJ8Mx+YR05CydlTQ0bI3FBohJC+UHrjD5I3hA wJUC1o+yVSOEd+zN3cG1EECIwkEQSmBgG5t/le2RdzfXOdpf9ku2/zoBpq00R54JxUKlfRM7 OPTv7X+1AKHkxOySdCZwGgvdh2Whuqs4kTvtco00gCFM9fBd5oi1RJuHtxHsj8+/XU15UItb jeo96CIlM5YUeoRLPT5mxZYWgYAARFeSFReNq/Tuwq9d8EokUrtAyrPayznliy53UJfWDVzl 925c0Cz0HWaP2fWj+uFcj/8K0bhptuWJQy0Poht1z3aJC1UjEgr1Xz8I7jeSJmIlA9plcJw2 k4dhWc7BTQRT5O+KARAAyFxAM28EQwLctr0CrQhYWZfMKzAhCw+EyrUJ+/e4uiAQ4OyXifRr ZV6kLRul3WbTB1kpA6wgCShO0N3vw8fFG2Cs6QphVagEH8yfQUroaVxgADYOTLHMOb7INS8r KI/uRNmE6bXTX27oaqCEXLMycqYlufad7hr42S/T8zNh5m2vl6T/1Poj2/ormViKwAxM+8qf xd8FNI4UKmq2zZE9mZ5PiSIX0qRgM0yCvxV39ex/nhxzouTBvv4Lb1ntplR/bMLrHxsCzhyM KDgcX7ApGm+y6YEsOvzw9rRCRuJpE4lth8ShgjTtNTHfklBD6Ztymc7q7bdPWpKOEvO5lDQ6 q8+KfENv862cOLlWLk7YR2+mHZ1PXGhWC7ggwEkfGJoXo0x8X+zgUKe2+9Jj4yEhfL0IbFYC z2J5d+cWVIBktI3xqkwLUZWuAbE3vgYA4h8ztR6l18NTPkiAvpNQEaL4ZRnAx22WdsQ8GlEW dyKZBWbLUdNcMmPfGi5FCw2nNvCyN6ktv5mTZE12EqgvpzYcuUGQPIMV9KTlSPum3NLDq8QI 6grbG8iNNpEBxmCQOKz2/BuYApU2hwt2E44fL8e6CRK3ridcRdqpueg75my6KkOqm8nSiMEc /pVIHwdJ9/quiuRaeC/tZWlYPIwDWgb8ZE/g66z35WAguMQ+EwfvgAUAEQEAAcLBZQQYAQIA DwUCU+TvigIbDAUJEswDAAAKCRDvc06md/MRKaZwD/9OI3o3gVmst/mGx6hVQry++ht8dFWN IiASPBvD3E5EWbqWi6mmqSIOS6CxjU0PncxTBPCXtzxo/WzuHGQg/xtNeQ0T8b2lBScZAw93 qm1IcHXLUe5w/Tap6YaDmSYCIZAdtbHzYfPW4JK7cmvcjvF8jhTFOBEOFVQkTi19G7caVot0 +wL1e2DRHDXAe5CinEpaLBlwHeEu/5j6wc3erohUZlK9IbAclj4iZTQbaq3EyqUXl59dBOON xmL5edJxzVishIYQGIyA9WP1SylXt+kO82NEqZG2OxdXAlzjuJ8C2pAG+nbLtDo4hcsiN/MA aX9/JB7MXclT5ioerF4yNgKEdfq7LmynsTUd8w/Ilyp7AD+BWoujyO94i8h9eKvjf9PvSwxQ uAjRpxne7ZJD8vCsMNXBHSbeEK2LiwStHL/w473viXpDD53J6OLxX6a5RummR+rixbMH7dgK MJQ7FlyDphm3or6CSkGEir1KA0y1vqQNFtHhguFapAWMDKaJjQQNgvZUmOo6hbZqmvUF1OWc d6GA6j3WOUe3fDJXfbq6P9Jmxq64op887dYKsg7xjQq/7KM7wyRcqXXcbBdgvNtVDP+EnzBN HyYY/3ms4YIHE5JHxQ9LV4yPcWkYTvb1XpNIFVbrSXAeyGHVNT+SO6olFovbWIC3Az9yesaM 1aSoTg== Message-ID: <839ee260-7ac0-9c78-5348-28e80b69799f@riseup.net> Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 20:48:17 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <85745a38e4464541d6357408fae1cfed@cock.li> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Making the case for flag day activation of taproot X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 20:48:27 -0000 It is good that social media drama can only make its own followers fork away. In bitcoin people represent themselves, if they want certain rules enforced they should have to actually tell their software to do that. The problem with BIP8 is that social media drama has a incentive to promote brinksmanship. It is not correct to say that this will work because "nobody will disobey Core". In reality it will work because basically everyone either wants taproot or has no opinion about taproot. Your argument depends heavily on the word "egregious". I've shown that for harmful changes like censorship can be resisted by the bitcoin community. Can you come up with an example of a bad change which won't be resisted? Here's another example of an easily-resisted change: A Core team that's been compromised might do a flag-day UASF where transactions are only confirmed if they pay a minimum of 1000 sat/vbyte in miner fee. The community could resist this by doing a counter-UASF where a transaction paying just 1 sat/vbyte is required to be included in the first block after the flay day. What alternative do you suggest? If you advocate allowing miners to activate soft forks then that still won't protect users. Because miners won't save users in my above example of a 1000 sat/vbyte price floor, in fact miners would see their income greatly increased if the soft fork was successful. So in fact the ability to do a counter-UASF is always what actually protected users, miner protection is nothing something to count on. On 03/03/2021 17:30, yanmaani@cock.li wrote: > On 2021-03-03 14:39, Chris Belcher via bitcoin-dev wrote: >> Enter flag day activation. With a flag day there can be no >> brinksmanship. A social media blitz cant do anything except have its own >> followers fork away. Crucially, miner signalling cant be used to change >> the activation date for nodes that didn't choose to and just passively >> follow signalling. Changing the activation date requires all those users >> to actually run different node software. > > Is that supposed to be a good thing? "We should do X because it'll work" > doesn't prove X is actually good. These things can be evil, but they can > also be legitimate opposition to a change. Taking away the power of a > "social media blitz" is not guaranteed to be a good thing! > >> What if one day the Core developer team uses the flag >> day method to do something bad? The bitcoin user >> community who wants to resist this can create their own >> counter-soft-fork full node. This forces a chain >> split. The real bitcoin which most people follow will be >> the chain without censorship. > > [edited for brevity] > > That will only work for really egregious changes. In practice, most > people will trust Core on all other (non-egregious) decisions, because > of the inertia inherent in disobeying them. > > What you suggest may be an efficient way to ram taproot through, but is > it inherently good? Nothing is free. This seems like de-facto forcing > people to go along with you, because you're convinced you're right. In > this case, you are, but you'd be convinced you'd be right even if you > weren't so. > > You're right in suggesting that it will work, but the reason why it will > work is because nobody wants to disobey Core. It seems immoral to > exploit this fact. > > At least you shouldn't hard-code it and require dissenters to fork away. > I exhort you to consider making all this controversial stuff settings > that can be changed by RPC command or command-line flag; set the default > value sure, but requiring a fork to change it is, in my opinion, > oppressive. > > (Also consider some compromise, such as ">95% miner support before flag > day or >33% on flag day") > > Best wishes > Yanmaani