Return-Path: Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::136]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 814D5C000B for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2022 04:17:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F8186127D for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2022 04:17:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 s83hWPiEXlJi for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2022 04:17:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail-ed1-x52d.google.com (mail-ed1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52d]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C4246126E for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2022 04:17:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ed1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id w4so5080156edc.7 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2022 21:17:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4cJsbupebR2KcqY2BHG6QdcBSTfu2lx6LB5WRRUevH0=; b=O1tF02x2R0YncBKiblhMSlsQVeCeS5c6zqLz47kBC83Ke4WaQAYyY/CoTXtRjU0wqs KWwdWZlUGylr+9xsGU4m6gVxfA09hAjvwNwdkyc4AfHITjoFMSz0TKz1pdKNnIQtVtFq gn1OrV508WWwei/Z20JKL3z9yzsNj7HPF6r6OTb/3D4Gglw/KBMkSBUgw9VdPkXzGLcV pD7AHpu+OHgwii+LbG6f4dNxuUipk8uMLKtKmMHE6hV1EaZpFBwUCORMJpznUPwN/Sa6 Ch6oOOKc3YP0g9dw+g5SvhDQvFyLHYwsJGtKGCBk0sCOAovUnSaQjzJtSYfC9j3z9zJ/ bpiQ== 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=4cJsbupebR2KcqY2BHG6QdcBSTfu2lx6LB5WRRUevH0=; b=yiOw8sfYw+JzNzA1GXTM/kYFLekzsE9vaWVeh437BPzgW1ziRRuN2hJ2mkrx4eEM24 Ewwn8z802GSRoQYLDaQn5Z9/qCvxP8nlV4ZE4WnpOKIgTFV3AxU2yy+KwOq2rtO2Sp3R Z9WbbqdFIpurenjXkHaGoBPgJx97b8zZsUG8pBtRzP50eDl8nu72jbmvbcsdr/NpTHue 8Q63sbpX0ZIxdKUwMB+BjrUNEzdEiL4M/lWpnNqQUT/32H8GivEKds0T/rRKQ+qgPg0v WzjgB+OGwlQuEFfXTJxcSU9eLo9kl0lzDQGxKTo2LSwzs3+SRUaVhZcZaoYU6nR5gYaX oBXA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5331eGkIrKfqxdxNIVmv49ttpSTYNdGvuUuP1nYC+LK6pEGnO/X/ FHPQZeYOKUvuk/A+fUTaR3g4NC/58gCK1lc72pY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwhBXJnK+TT7eRZTuk15VfnnAvRZ/6KGhOt3BkaPkEYtkyKCepCAigUgBq1N6xCwcarptmlMKSq/0CNAn+q5HY= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:50cb:b0:418:d750:9cba with SMTP id h11-20020a05640250cb00b00418d7509cbamr2566008edb.16.1647490656228; Wed, 16 Mar 2022 21:17:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Billy Tetrud Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2022 23:17:20 -0500 Message-ID: To: Jeremy Rubin , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000055db2a05da624f69" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 17 Mar 2022 09:32:33 +0000 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2022 04:17:39 -0000 --00000000000055db2a05da624f69 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" @Aj Your steps seem reasonable. I definitely agree step one (talking to each other) is obviously the ideal solution, when it works. Step 2 (futures market) is the option I would say I understand the least. In any case, a futures market seems like it only incorporates the opinions/predictions of the group of people willing to bet money on things like this. This is likely to be a rather small group of particular types of people. I find it a bit difficult to reconcile the theories that betting rings like this are good at predicting against the inherent selection bias of the group of betting individuals. Going just by number of individuals (or probably even by amount of currency risked) this seems like a futures market would inherently be a small and biased group. Potentially useful, but I wouldn't assume that it could be taken stand-alone as a proxy for consensus. I'm curious what you think about a coin-weighted poll like I suggested here being added to that list of steps? Surely this would be a broader group of people than a futures market, tho still obviously a group subject to selection bias. @jeremy drops the bomb. I'm sure Jorge will be running this within the year. On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 12:25 PM Jeremy Rubin via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Boker tov bitcoin devs, > > A mechanism of soft-forking against activation exists. What more do you >> want? >> > > Agreed -- that should be enough. > > > >> Are we supposed to write the code on behalf of this hypothetical group of >> users who may or may not exist for them just so that they can have a node >> that remains stalled on Speedy Trial lockin? >> > That simply isn't reasonable, but if you think it is, I invite you to >> create such a fork. >> > > Disagree. > > It is a reasonable ask. > > I've done it in about 40 lines of python: > https://github.com/jeremyrubin/forkd > > Merry Christmas Jorge, please vet the code carefully before running. > > Peace, > > Jeremy > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > --00000000000055db2a05da624f69 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
@Aj Your steps seem reasonable. I definitely agree step on= e (talking to each other) is obviously the ideal solution, when it works.= =C2=A0

Step 2 (futures market) is the option I would say= I understand the least. In any case, a futures market seems like it only i= ncorporates the opinions/predictions of the group of people willing to bet = money on things like this. This is likely to be a rather small group of par= ticular types of people. I find it a bit difficult to reconcile=C2=A0the th= eories that betting rings like this are good at predicting against the inhe= rent selection bias of the group of betting individuals. Going just by numb= er of individuals (or probably even by amount of currency risked) this seem= s like a futures market would inherently be a small and biased group. Poten= tially useful, but I wouldn't assume that it could be taken stand-alone= as a proxy for consensus.=C2=A0

I'm curious w= hat you think about a coin-weighted poll li= ke I suggested here=C2=A0being added to that list of steps? Surely this= would be a broader group of people than a futures market, tho still obviou= sly a group subject to selection bias.=C2=A0

@jere= my drops the bomb. I'm sure Jorge will be running this within the year.= =C2=A0



On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 12:25= PM Jeremy Rubin via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<= /a>> wrote:
<= div dir=3D"ltr">
Boker tov bitcoin devs,

A mechanism of soft-forking against activation exists.=C2=A0 What m= ore do you want?

Agreed -- that should be enough.

<= /div>
=C2=A0
Are we supposed to write the = code on behalf of this hypothetical group of users who may or may not exist= for them just so that they can have a node that remains stalled on Speedy = Trial lockin?=C2=A0


It is a reasonable ask.

I've done it in about 40 lines of python: https://github.com/jeremyr= ubin/forkd

Merry Christmas Jorge, please vet the code caref= ully before running.

Peace,

Jeremy
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
= bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail= man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--00000000000055db2a05da624f69--