Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherblock]

@Norway:

The strategy to send BCH(SV) coins to miners as fees if you split your coins is great.

How does that even work?

 

[Norway]

@cypherblock

By using old rules from Bitcoin 0.1:

In order to do this, we use the structure that was derived in Bitcoin 0.1. We allow the bad transactions to be used as an incentive. That is, rather than rejecting these, we allow them to be used as a miner incentive, a fee.

If developers add an unauthorised OP_CODE, it is to be treated as a miner fee. The honest miners are paid to take the value in the chain that does not alter the structure of Bitcoin, making the system more stable and resilient.

Source:
https://medium.com/@craig_10243/bitcoin-is-all-about-incentives-72894518f6b5

 

[freetrader]

@cypherblock : it works like anything Craig does - by proof of blog post

 

[Norway]

@freetrader Would you accept a DSV tx to your wallet with substantial funds and with no protection from DSV transactions like the Bitcoin.com wallet on november 16?

EDIT: And what if someone sprays the UTXO set with tiny DSV transactions? Is your wallet ready for that?

 

[freetrader]

Would you accept a DSV tx to your wallet with substantial funds and with no protection from DSV transactions like the Bitcoin.com wallet on november 16?

In Bitcoin you can't stop someone from sending you money. It's a feature, not a bug.

My wallet is ready - I've turned off sending of scheduled payments and it has coin control.
There's gotta be a plugin for quarantining unwanted dust - I still haven't looked around for that but if it doesn't exist yet, that an opportunity for someone to code something...

 

[Norway]

@freetrader
Ok. So you can't use your wallet after november 15?
How small is unwanted dust?
What if someone send you a larger transaction?

Take this scenario: Roy fell out with his buddy Bob over a girl. Bob wanted revenge, and sent a DSV transaction to Roy's Bitcoin.com wallet (an old HD address he had used in the past). Next time Roy use his wallet, the output is tainting his other outputs.

No more BCH(SV) for Roy...

 

[freetrader]

@Norway
Why shouldn't I be able to use my wallet?
I don't need to split all my coins at once.
'Dust' limit here should be customizable.

 

[Norway]

Meh, you have to figure this out yourself.

Vin Armani gets it, even though he hates CSW and SV: (EDIT: I take that back. I don't think he hates CSW.)

[doublepost=1541723450][/doublepost]Watch out for SatoshiShotgun if you value BCH(SV)

 

[cypherblock]

So I guess you have a tx with an output like

.5 BCH
<op_dup>blah blah <op_datasigverify>

Then SV code will allow a miner to add that .5 to their own outputs, and it won't record the original output as a utxo? Sounds pretty sketchy to me.

 

[Norway]

@cypherblock AFAIK, DSV transactions will be replayed on BCH(SV) where they will be regarded as illegal and the outputs sent to the miner at a point of time in the future where this is implemented. Nobody wants money that may be 100% converted to fees in the future. It's a hot potatoe.
[doublepost=1541725938,1541724954][/doublepost]

Sounds pretty sketchy to me.

It's not just sketchy. It's the 1967 LA Rams defence

 

[throwaway]

https://github.com/bitcoin-sv/bitcoin-sv/pull/7

There are more ways to split coins than DSV, like using MUL or whatever on the SV chain, and coinbase transactions. Nothing can prevent all potential coin splits.

@freetrader

Christoph Bergmann was asking about chains of transactions. Apparently some people want miners to not mine them or anything with DSV or anything with new SV opcodes so that the clients for all 3 blockchains (including clients configured for the "do-nothing chain") remain compatible with each other, including CTOR (but that would require custom clients that order transactions lexicographically even if it's not needed on that chain, and don't mine chains of transactions unless they happen to have the right lexicographic order). Very realistic. /s

 

[freetrader]

@throwaway : Yeah, I figured they would come up with such a proposal to work around CTOR.
This has been discussed on and off by them. No further comments except: Great! Do that!

In the BCH-slap-of-the-day column, today we have:

 

[cypherdoc]

There's gotta be a plugin for quarantining unwanted dust - I still haven't looked around for that but if it doesn't exist yet, that an opportunity for someone to code something...

this is desperately needed even w/o the spectre of the fork. Chainanalysis has been spamming/tracking everyone's significant wallet addresses for years now.

 

[Norway]

 

[throwaway]

@freetrader @cypherdoc

BU (and maybe ABC and others, can't check) has a "Lock" option for every input in the Coin Selection window. You have to right-click the input to see it.

 

[AdrianX]

The thing about social engineering is that we're not well adapted to it. The virtue/moral of judging an idea by its merit, not the person who proposes it, is something that can be gamed. Someone (i.e., Craig), can propose a thousand bad ideas, and if every time you insist on judging the idea by its merit... something will slip through, we can't be perfect judges 100% of the time. It's like a Sybil-attack, but with a barrage of ideas/proposals rather than fake identities. The rational defense is to ignore someone after recognizing that they are a bad actor.

I'm surprised, but I actively avoid reading authors names, and when I do I often have no history to associate with them. I agree with Gavin Andreson on this, ideas matter, not authors.

[doublepost=1541733971,1541732999][/doublepost]

Are you talking about this scheme?
https://github.com/bitcoincashorg/bitcoincash.org/blob/5f087230d2d2aafa0490fe6cf58c807f8d8c31ba/spec/bip-adaptiveblocksize.mediawiki

(Up to) 10x every 45 days is plenty fast!

If you are going to have the peek so as low as 10X (the 30 Day Block size average in is 43.28kB) that's a 432.80 kB block limit based on current data that won't adjust to accommodate peak demand. to put peek demand in perspective at present we have a 32,000.00 kB limit.

If you had a moving average of 10X based on 3-5 blocks not days you could discourage huge blocks but still adjust block size to accommodate peak demand.

 

[AdrianX]

@Dusty

maybe this tweetstorm helps: Not that I really get it or believe it works. But the outcome is too nice to not think about it.

Edit:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DrarB3ZX4AApBo2.jpg:large

In contrast to bitcoin.com who I believe are intentionally being proactive but making a mistake by incorporating new transaction types.

A responsible approach for wallets would be to broadcast both transactions and someone in BitPay position to have a statement like: We run ABC, and we accknowlage the risk of a split, to protect our users and the network we will be supporting ABC but we won't be suporting new transaction types untill they are widly adopted by our users.

This would aid miners and everyone to hash it out minimizing risk of transactions being split. Instead, we have ABC's lead developer celebrating his territorial expansion, no doubly his crazy Joker nemesis will be doing the same if the tables were reversed.

Obviously many people will try cheat and force or favour one rule set over the other by splitting coins, here exchanges and services would need to put split coins in an incubator until the network has resolved the proposed rule changes.

I can't really imagine a worse scenario than we have today. Resolving this mess could trigger a crypto winter, especially if the nemesis jokes has a large inventory of coins.

 

[AdrianX]

@cypherblock : it works like anything Craig does - by proof of blog post

So why are people so scared that he can mine coins that are secured by someone else's private key?

 

[chriswilmer]

I am living in the most bizarre world at the moment. I can't believe this is a thing! WTF
@Peter R Greag has it in for you,

I think he hates that he does not have an inside angle with Ledger Journal. I guess triggered by the awarding of the Pitt Cyber Accelerator Grant by the Institute for Cyber Law, Policy, and Security. Congratulations.

I'm guessing he's looking for a sympathetic ear with CSW!
I still don't agree with your handling of the Selfish mining arguments but so be it, our collective immune system will be stronger for it in the end.

Just want to quickly point out that Greg WAS part of Ledger. We were very honored to have him. Then when Blockstream happened he mysteriously left the journal and didn't want to have any associations with it. We were really bummed.

 

[AdrianX]

There's gotta be a plugin for quarantining unwanted dust

Electron does a good Job, I've got rid of all my unwanted dust. How could you design an algorithm to distinguish between what is a wanted transaction and what is not?
[doublepost=1541739452][/doublepost]

Watch out for SatoshiShotgun if you value BCH(SV)

I'm loving electron Cash coin control. I' not going to be manipulated like this, but I agree with the principal of not splitting.