1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
|
Return-Path: <roconnor@blockstream.io>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34D1692
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 2 Oct 2016 21:47:05 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ua0-f175.google.com (mail-ua0-f175.google.com
[209.85.217.175])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6341CE
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 2 Oct 2016 21:47:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ua0-f175.google.com with SMTP id p25so15169474uaa.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 02 Oct 2016 14:47:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=blockstream-io.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=yrWq9ILzv0nzXWGCYBk4yocPrQ8Ycvf9UHHJ6ROuNwg=;
b=iTXELbbqlu/egSDlxNGoO+b48TscfFtpLUOo0OvxiF2pvilj5QFojdjDz6LULgoPoB
76/4S+WBOIF5sqfUnPcL5pcUBu9HqdJJCDdmzmccgIYpSIGCHLFbEtCw06gXWsuHPouE
9O01DoGXS7U85eLS7VO34ok03CeOG74Ppf/rno86L3ph0FdbwEzFGW4gFgZ7CAjwFVjr
IgMLKCIpA0ao0o0GMZnRVxcRkgc+97jZnMrHWkOaIcmdShNuUfLdBZjtiMyahvvNFDdg
sl37pp+ilGK1hqbBzSx0LJ4SN17z9dbBilfxbuCmL5ItlA2XA26uc/VRJrd0D6w6HKrA
mjHA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=yrWq9ILzv0nzXWGCYBk4yocPrQ8Ycvf9UHHJ6ROuNwg=;
b=UQ80sVIz2uV8z0OCMkHtnIR36jdzwkhUVCz5S8r7DLBAjFlpEI0q+81RV26kmBCCgk
e1MHFIR/yIiF7V8D9j6O+xSEF/ioNh24RRy8gU8rpeSW6CW8A6DIbOb21rBGh7Onv7B3
O7fDy3kxl+XatMeXBxdLHKjQK2U4/EShl8hHm0zJntEOb07RomO00gbL9qyi9+np98YI
iLPqrIJzK+vYMlvPSIqm+I4qe9RuexWpV4+9S6c7oaKZruaqjfCvC02m96/YDZXA0cN2
DuKrcPmEul5LtG53uvBQu5QFB8U9ntdiHS/WDMOn8on/MvoY+liRP+vswfOT3MUK7pYi
l//A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RlRpjb2begJFronfAZG4kNEYo6k36Jd1HdunJ7HAWkJl2vHiRULxw1rllJ2qbEtWOiI1WU9XLpDj6G1TzZy
X-Received: by 10.159.40.71 with SMTP id c65mr2519710uac.46.1475444823888;
Sun, 02 Oct 2016 14:47:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.176.3.102 with HTTP; Sun, 2 Oct 2016 14:46:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201610022128.52401.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <CAKzdR-rsy1m-H4fYFuCim5+YJi_C2kgjxymM8A7_nEuqsZoO+g@mail.gmail.com>
<20161002171137.GA18452@fedora-21-dvm>
<CAAy62_+cqR0-DBbKhePo+VqTJc099zXJR0EurLyb1XURUCT36g@mail.gmail.com>
<201610022128.52401.luke@dashjr.org>
From: "Russell O'Connor" <roconnor@blockstream.io>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2016 17:46:43 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMZUoKkPrVeqv3Xitp42e1mCqxj3pMSOUW_pTTrb36jc9w71Vg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c047d3e9d2e23053de8c486
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 02 Oct 2016 22:29:16 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Drivechain proposal using OP_COUNT_ACKS
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2016 21:47:05 -0000
--94eb2c047d3e9d2e23053de8c486
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> But I would argue that in this scenario, the only way it
> would become invalid is the equivalent of a double-spend... and therefore
> it
> may be acceptable in relation to this argument.
>
The values returned by OP_COUNT_ACKS vary in their exact value depending on
which block this transaction ends up in. While the proposed use of this
operation is somewhat less objectionable (although still objectionable to
me), nothing stops users from using OP_EQUALVERIFY and and causing their
transaction fluctuate between acceptable and unacceptable, with no party
doing anything like a double spend. This is a major problem with the
proposal.
--94eb2c047d3e9d2e23053de8c486
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
<blockquote style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204=
,204,204);padding-left:1ex" class=3D"gmail_quote">But I would argue that in=
this scenario, the only way it<br>
would become invalid is the equivalent of a double-spend... and therefore i=
t<br>
may be acceptable in relation to this argument.<br></blockquote><div><br></=
div><div>The values returned by <span class=3D"gmail-im">OP_COUNT_ACKS vary=
in their exact value depending on which block this transaction ends up in.=
=C2=A0 While the proposed use of this operation is somewhat less objectiona=
ble (although still objectionable to me), nothing stops users from using OP=
_EQUALVERIFY and and causing their transaction fluctuate between acceptable=
and unacceptable, with no party doing anything like a double spend.=C2=A0 =
This is a major problem with the proposal.<br></span></div></div></div></di=
v>
--94eb2c047d3e9d2e23053de8c486--
|
