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
|
Return-Path: <luke@dashjr.org>
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::136])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B28B0C002C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:37:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A99D60D76
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:37:49 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.517
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.517 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, BITCOIN_OBFU_SUBJ=1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1,
NICE_REPLY_A=-0.117, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dashjr.org
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id yQbQdP_gIf8f
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:37:48 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [IPv6:2001:470:88ff:2f::1])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F3DB60B2E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:37:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ishibashi.lan (unknown [12.151.133.18])
(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8C86838A1CC4;
Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:37:45 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=dashjr.org; s=zinan;
t=1650523065; bh=jANvMJq7Jk4ofDbw/wD4Cyki4SSnHnIgop3PaMqMu+Y=;
h=From:To:Subject:Date:Cc:References:In-Reply-To;
b=pfb7/3EkWTeavpDB850rRZo1ZbXTKyvA9+NjJYbEhFzZxbSrc6aP5EoAuik9C7pFr
tHPh0x4wcNP+XfD46oXRm4AfFAEmVIZwX7DqeX/BXgp8eFdFY3MAdThIbjtpjDCFBe
Pq50kqrCaV0QJsyhSAPHmcvNDeT8wac/CW6IFsmo=
From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
To: Jeremy Rubin <jeremy.l.rubin@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:37:43 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10
References: <64a34b4d46461da322be51b53ec2eb01@dtrt.org>
<202204210556.54781.luke@dashjr.org>
<CAD5xwhjGzWDw=dunVM5ZW8OvYCHb6xsXBw-ecwx6WAQq84sx5w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD5xwhjGzWDw=dunVM5ZW8OvYCHb6xsXBw-ecwx6WAQq84sx5w@mail.gmail.com>
X-KMail-QuotePrefix: >
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <202204210637.44581.luke@dashjr.org>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Automatically reverting ("transitory") soft forks,
e.g. for CTV
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:37:49 -0000
On Thursday 21 April 2022 06:20:15 Jeremy Rubin wrote:
> > While reverting Segwit wouldn't be possible, it IS entirely possible to
> > do an additional softfork to either weigh witness data at the full 4
> > WU/Byte rate (same as other data), or to reduce the total weight limit so
> > as to extend the witness discount to non-segwit transactions (so scriptSig
> > is similarly discounted).
>
> What if I pre signed a transaction which was valid under the discounted
> weighting, but the increase in weight would make it invalid? This would
> serve to confiscate funds. Let's not do that.
You'd be confiscating your own funds by making an absurd spending condition.
By this argument, ALL softforks would have to be ruled out.
> > Furthermore, the variant of Speedy Trial being used (AFAIK) is the BIP9
> > variant which has no purpose other than to try to sabotage parallel UASF
> > efforts.
>
> Why didn't you upstream the code that was used for the actual activation
> into Bitcoin Core in the last year?
>
> In preparing it I just used what was available in Core now, surely the last
> year you could have gotten the appropriate patches done?
They were done, reviewed, and deployed in time for Taproot. You personally
played a part in sabotaging efforts to get it merged into Core, and violating
the community's trust in it by instead merging your BIP9 ST without
consensus. Don't play dumb. You have nobody to blame but yourself.
Luke
|
