Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AC1E900 for ; 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 ; 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 ; Sat, 16 Sep 2017 01:42:53 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2017 01:42:53 +0000 From: Andrew Poelstra To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: <20170916014252.GN24183@boulet> References: <9e212eae-08d5-d083-80d9-a8e29679fcdc@osc.co.cr> <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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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--