MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <trinity-5b2c14a6-d74e-48a6-992c-c22d156b8343-1437772358792@3capp-mailcom-bs07>
From: "Slurms MacKenzie" <slurms@gmx.us>
To: pete@petertodd.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 23:12:38 +0200
Importance: normal
Sensitivity: Normal
In-Reply-To: <20150724174320.GB25947@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <CAGLBAhepXCaChSBsz49YNnLOOpiy9nsNYqNv0NH+G3W=17=2yA@mail.gmail.com>
	<trinity-44986062-638d-4c20-a1f8-56a7c7cec648-1437709050654@3capp-mailcom-bs10>
	<2275059.uyAkQvreAU@coldstorage>,
	<20150724174320.GB25947@savin.petertodd.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Roadmap 2015,
 or "If We Do Nothing" Analysis
Precedence: list

They do not run anything but BitcoinJ (evidenced by them blindly following =
invalid chains), so no proper consensus checking going on here at all=2E Co=
nnected to my nodes is a bad peer (doesn=E2=80=99t relay inventory but down=
loads everything) from 37=2E187=2E136=2E15, with the user agent /BitcoinJ:0=
=2E12SNAPHOT/Satoshi:0=2E2=2E0/ which is owned by blockchain=2Einfo=2E You =
can also submit an invalid transaction through their /pushtx interface and =
get a mixture of noise and BitcoinJ error messages out of it as well=2E=20

If even the people who have to their claim hundreds of thousands of wallet=
s are relying on their security don=E2=80=99t bother running even a single =
node to sanity check against, who are we really going to expect people to i=
n the future if the load goes 8x, 16x, 32x higher? Like CoinBase and others=
, these are the companies which are claimed will be the ones supporting the=
 network with ludicrous sized blocks because they have a financial incentiv=
e to=2E=20

Well, they don't even do it now when it could be achieved with a $5 VPS=2E=
=20


> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 at 8:43 PM
> From: "Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists=2Elinuxfoundation=
=2Eorg>
> To: "Thomas Zander" <thomas@thomaszander=2Ese>
> Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists=2Elinuxfoundation=2Eorg
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Roadmap 2015, or "If We Do Nothing" A=
nalysis
> We can test the fact that blockchain=2Einfo's wallet and block explorer
> has behaved in a way consistent with not running a full node - they have
> shown invalid data that any full node would reject on multiple
> occasions, most recently invalid confirmations during the BIP66 fork=2E