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
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
|
Return-Path: <clem.ds@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C45142278
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:30:00 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-qk0-f177.google.com (mail-qk0-f177.google.com
[209.85.220.177])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4370412D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:30:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by qkcf65 with SMTP id f65so67614222qkc.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 05 Oct 2015 05:29:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=zAIrKQ6pM4vLYleDtSrb3MDBqqd4899Z21ytWcCkFag=;
b=GAKY88k7B+CI4G1GPhKPryd8Q7vcwmh1Xo8UWV19/BkMbQHJnJhiHRRhL5ozClswQ2
PHrqLKuyZVppds0Wxai53Pfxu6Onbz4TSeHZLjth0fm8LHa0+HK7Wi7KkPVD9z7DgkY9
n/QNxukiDGmY6OJBS6TlaVX/Y4vp818hujBdjF4wfhLhz22rAjiVmNUEd73bEz/Muw/r
8ZhkKdEWmOzpnxg3w4+POksOLmu0KOa5I18K0FYbdW8c+niybOtyC5/KpaybXmPSw4CN
sDohzHH5PdBM8Q9vi9GX9AvQjydOUF4nRB+naP9bbYo/X42dcz36UiNzQHb+0vht6YWe
mrqg==
X-Received: by 10.55.198.4 with SMTP id b4mr23753441qkj.13.1444048199519; Mon,
05 Oct 2015 05:29:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAKfs=Z_jVKtjeSHM1a6n+ch6WcazkshmDgN4Wi1K_kLBUE4o4w@mail.gmail.com>
<BLU436-SMTP132FA09C343ACB7C82E6C98C64B0@phx.gbl>
<CA+w+GKT0Th4Tpk=cCxfJwsMdB5NLrARACU3_qiRn4Ns7z_PXYQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CADm_WcaVbj98G9acqbwUxYudHhWh01FLpm5KgL3rqHffd5WCXg@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+w+GKTkos5gwZmN_1c7wUFmJgZMJGzZbaZeWO=Rwt3Ta3Zbzw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDp1r78OtM=MfHqvV17-6N=nCG+hFOwqL0R6DHz9SjLmsg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAP63atY+yH5BinWYAyxkqER5wA9Lj6pFC0LritSDLcDuBVbXrg@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDqi2tHHVN6NqsGwhUka+Scza-UcLe=_UhxZx8hvytt5BQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDqi2tHHVN6NqsGwhUka+Scza-UcLe=_UhxZx8hvytt5BQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment_Elbaz?= <clem.ds@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:29:49 +0000
Message-ID: <CAP63atYmt5zEexcon+-jBTFcc=toAX0Bbn5J+R0Yktb1MbZirQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11499ceef8945505215aab30
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Let's deploy BIP65 CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY!
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:30:01 -0000
--001a11499ceef8945505215aab30
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I fail to see how the number of confirmations has anything to do with it.
With a non-upgraded Bitcoin software during a soft fork, you get the same
blocks as everyone else, and you get the same confirmed transactions as
everyone else. So you do have the exact same "writings" as everyone else to
calculate your balance.
The problem is that some transactions that are meaningless to you are
actually meaningful to people using an upgraded Bitcoin software.
Therefore during a softfork, while you can not miss the *existence* of a
transaction, you can miss its *meaning*.
If Bitcoin was just a decentralized whiteboard for people to write on it,
that would be no problem.
But as soon as you try to actually use Bitcoin (that is, calculate the
accurate balance of a wallet in a very broad sense), you can be led a wrong
result if you did not upgrade, which is a critical problem for financial
software.
And because nothing prevent people to send you transactions of a new type,
you have no way to "opt out" of this problem.
Le lun. 5 oct. 2015 =C3=A0 14:16, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@jtimon.cc> a =C3=
=A9crit :
>
> On Oct 5, 2015 2:08 PM, "Cl=C3=A9ment Elbaz" <clem.ds@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > It will get correct results about :
> > - the existence every block
> > - the existence of every transaction
> >
> > It will get incorrect results :
> > - about the nature of some transactions
>
> Given the assumptions above, only of transactions without enough
> confirmations.
>
> > - and therefore, about the balances of some wallets.
>
> Not if the wallet waits for enough confirmations.
>
--001a11499ceef8945505215aab30
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">I fail to see how the number of confirmations has anything=
to do with it.<div><br></div><div>With a non-upgraded Bitcoin software dur=
ing a soft fork, you get the same blocks as everyone else, and you get the =
same confirmed transactions as everyone else. So you do have the exact same=
"writings" as everyone else to calculate your balance.</div><div=
><br></div><div>The problem is that some transactions that are meaningless =
to you are actually meaningful to people using an upgraded Bitcoin software=
.</div><div><br></div><div>Therefore during a softfork, while you can not m=
iss the <u>existence</u> of a transaction, you can miss its <u>meaning</u>.=
=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>If Bitcoin was just a decentralized whitebo=
ard for people to write on it, that would be no problem.</div><div><br></di=
v><div>But as soon as you try to actually use Bitcoin (that is, calculate t=
he accurate balance of a wallet in a very broad sense), you can be led a wr=
ong result if you did not upgrade, which is a critical problem for financia=
l software.</div><div><br></div><div>And because nothing prevent people to =
send you transactions of a new type, you have no way to "opt out"=
of this problem.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class=
=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr">Le=C2=A0lun. 5 oct. 2015 =C3=A0=C2=A014:1=
6, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@jtimon.cc> a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0:<br></div><=
blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px=
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir=3D"ltr"><br>
On Oct 5, 2015 2:08 PM, "Cl=C3=A9ment Elbaz" <<a href=3D"mailt=
o:clem.ds@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">clem.ds@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> It will get correct results about :<br>
> - the existence every block<br>
> - the existence of every transaction<br>
><br>
> It will get incorrect results :<br>
> - about the nature of some transactions</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">Given the assumptions above, only of transactions without en=
ough confirmations.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">> - and therefore, about the balances of some wallets.</p=
>
<p dir=3D"ltr">Not if the wallet waits for enough confirmations.<br>
</p>
</blockquote></div>
--001a11499ceef8945505215aab30--
|
