Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E8CAC002D for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 06:23:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 692F6812C6 for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 06:23:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 692F6812C6 Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=synonym-to.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.i=@synonym-to.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=P9RLTRyn X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZLgOiCYReQaY for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 06:23:37 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org E97C6812BE Received: from mail-qt1-x82c.google.com (mail-qt1-x82c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82c]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E97C6812BE for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 06:23:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qt1-x82c.google.com with SMTP id s3so7134285qtn.12 for ; Sun, 16 Oct 2022 23:23:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=synonym-to.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=22LaAPDJ8F6K1e0Fn359B4EOQ0ds8UMn7yqH5vG4uv0=; b=P9RLTRynaFmSsB6/3f1fFcTbjFC7R1UeIIIgGt/6sm74D3x7VHiQ8K+2IsF04PPi5Y y2O+uIG7Y9DIPCbLm1/cTwxT15+6s25Rcr1jM//I2tVctvZS9bOqXEZUcAIGRf0Bt5sb ngIIDP9TaEf8g/K8y++WpMviT9yHCM8O9EL2wVvfpCEJzEwarfU150z4KFyI7vkzO1I/ qXkNsIn9yP7Bqilm4b9VmOpbfhukjeFxmy+k3+WAvU0r+E0dpS5zTYPoxHCqL3ZudkmV hJZ+fbNLz/FWyHipMwjDJ7IiNSHgRn1SQxZKTqv0GqfTq7GLoLG1F0DX7DFLB4ePwYWf LqXQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=22LaAPDJ8F6K1e0Fn359B4EOQ0ds8UMn7yqH5vG4uv0=; b=d94Ukp3DKH4CA5azhMe6RGJWJDTvIl21FmdDIU23Zl+3lVZ2LjBaVgn/bAlbCSWUFm /zG0GCr4weoDn2+mv7wN8omWtrQ7XvzJlHPXDssNBMfE2JYX0PUVIevC5PCLtqzt+xge OYRBpFhKi1vGAa0OmQEBe72gDHZcc1FTcmV1H9obGBJvvM2S4aLpd7Lq7i/0+YCtu7qi XCctH5qXAMet4astPDBOx+VqqXvXH6eKuKjmQfwfyGxsnK1dRTiXLquw9I0qPH5qjv8+ Jx7XbP9/8PaROtzBbtyNXyxPgPGILxhJ6yV9Pus6jYrqBJPH/afIhYfkWc0dFXHQNC6r FuCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1h2VWmjAZAWiElW71FWw5eMQ432Lpv2R4Q+PAGJbc/oFTxBwFE TTdVyk9XGInlSWA2kZQOCYq4Q+aei7SGwQ9sp6D2icQ/cUbdqZRHeis= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM6t5Il64UfMuwEiq1koadXFKNlR3pj2gIL2kGEYH7R6xRNnGdrs+oUFiWhW6tEYZLtj1sAWl0M9SYm5Rw9k5xo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1316:b0:39c:e8e6:7038 with SMTP id v22-20020a05622a131600b0039ce8e67038mr3613190qtk.262.1665987815219; Sun, 16 Oct 2022 23:23:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: John Carvalho Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:23:20 +0200 Message-ID: To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ed3ab905eb350385" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 11:39:27 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Does Bitcoin require or have an honest majority or a rational one? (re rbf) (Jeremy Rubin) 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: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 06:23:38 -0000 --000000000000ed3ab905eb350385 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Simply, 0conf acceptance can be monitored and enforced by the merchant and exposure to doublespends can be both mitigated and limited in size per block. It is less expensive to be double-spent occasionally than to have a delayed checkout experience. Responsible 0conf acceptance is both rational and trusting. RBF assurances are optionally enforced by miners, and can be assisted by node mempool policies. It is not reliable to expect replaceable payments to be enforced in a system designed to enforce integrity of payments. RBF is both irrational and trusting. RBF is a whim of a feature where engineers made the mistake of thinking a hack that basically incentivizes rollbacks and uncertainty might be useful because we can pretend Bitcoin has an undo button, and we can pretend to game the fee market by low-balling rates until txns get in. Now RBF just kinda haunts us as the establishment keeps baking it deeper and deeper into Bitcoin, despite almost no one using it, and despite it having negative consequences on more popular use cases. Miners serve full nodes. What is more likely, a node set that prefers blocks with replaced txns, or a node set that rejects blocks with replaced txns? -- John Carvalho CEO, Synonym.to --000000000000ed3ab905eb350385 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Simply, 0conf acceptance can be monitored and enforce= d by the merchant and exposure to doublespends can be both mitigated and li= mited in size per block. It is less expensive to be double-spent occasional= ly than to have a delayed checkout experience. Responsible 0conf acceptance= is both rational and trusting.=C2=A0

RBF assuranc= es are optionally enforced by miners, and can be assisted by node=C2=A0memp= ool policies. It is not reliable to expect replaceable payments to be enfor= ced in a system designed to enforce integrity of payments. RBF is both irra= tional and trusting.

RBF is a whim of a feature wh= ere engineers made the mistake of thinking a hack that basically incentiviz= es rollbacks and uncertainty might be useful because we can pretend Bitcoin= has an undo button, and we can pretend to game the fee market by low-balli= ng rates until txns get in.=C2=A0

Now RBF just kin= da haunts us as the=C2=A0establishment keeps baking it deeper and deeper in= to Bitcoin, despite almost no one using it, and despite it having negative = consequences on more popular use cases.=C2=A0

Mine= rs serve full nodes. What is more likely, a node set that prefers blocks wi= th replaced txns, or a node set that rejects blocks with replaced txns?=C2= =A0


--
John Carvalho
=
CEO,=C2=A0Synonym.to
--000000000000ed3ab905eb350385--