Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5zVM-0001Uv-6m for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 16:51:00 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitcoins.info designates 70.90.2.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=70.90.2.18; envelope-from=milly@bitcoins.info; helo=mail.help.org; Received: from mail.help.org ([70.90.2.18]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Z5zVL-0001wm-4G for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 16:51:00 +0000 Received: from [10.1.10.25] (B [10.1.10.25]) by mail.help.org with ESMTPA ; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 12:50:50 -0400 Message-ID: <5584486D.6020309@bitcoins.info> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 12:50:53 -0400 From: Milly Bitcoin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net References: <20150619103959.GA32315@savin.petertodd.org> <04CE3756-B032-464C-8FBD-7ACDD1A3197D@gmail.com> <812d8353e66637ec182da31bc0a9aac1@riseup.net> <1727885.UUNByX4Jyd@crushinator> In-Reply-To: <1727885.UUNByX4Jyd@crushinator> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.1 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address X-Headers-End: 1Z5zVL-0001wm-4G Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] F2Pool has enabled full replace-by-fee X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 16:51:00 -0000 "prima facie" generally means that in a court case the burden of proof shifts from one party to another. For instance, if you have a federal trademark registration that is prima fascia evidence of those rights even though they could still be challenged. To say a prosecutor would have prima fascia evidence of a crime because double spend was detected is quite a stretch. On 6/19/2015 12:36 PM, Matt Whitlock wrote: > On Friday, 19 June 2015, at 3:53 pm, justusranvier@riseup.net wrote: >> I'd also like to note that "prima facie" doesn't mean "always", it means >> that "the default assumption, unless proven otherwise." > Why would you automatically assume fraud by default? Shouldn't the null hypothesis be the default? Without any information one way or another, you ought to make *no assumption* about the fraudulence or non-fraudulence of any given double-spend. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >