Do we need to consider that someone may have a timelocked big tx, with
private key lost?
I think we need to tell people not to do this. Related discussion:
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-November/011656.html
Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-12-29 00:35 寫到:
Occur
Occured to me that this hasn't been mentioned before...
We can trivially fix the quadratic CHECK(MULTI)SIG execution time issue
by soft-forking in a limitation on just SignatureHash() to only return
true if the tx size is <100KB. (or whatever limit makes sense)
This fix has the advantage over sch
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Far more concerning is network propagation effects between large and
> small miners. For that class of issues, if you are in an environemnt
> where selfish mining is possible - a fair
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:00:37PM -0500, Emin Gün Sirer via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > In the context of KYC, this techniques would likely hold up in court,
> > which means that if this stuff becomes a more serious problem it's
> > perfectly viable for large, well-resourced, pools to prevent block
> >
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Emin Gün Sirer <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> Do you specifically mean selfish mining as defined in Emin Gün
>> Sirer/Ittay Ey
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Peter Todd wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 26, 2015 at 12:12:13AM -0800, Multipool Admin wrote:
> > Any attempt to 'fix' this problem, would most likely require changes to
> all
> > mining software, why not just make mining more decentralized in general?
> >
> > For example
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Do you specifically mean selfish mining as defined in Emin Gün
> Sirer/Ittay Eyal's paper? Keep in mind that attack is only a significant
> issue in a scenario - one malicious miner with >
On Sat, Dec 26, 2015 at 12:12:13AM -0800, Multipool Admin wrote:
> Any attempt to 'fix' this problem, would most likely require changes to all
> mining software, why not just make mining more decentralized in general?
>
> For example, allow anyone to submit proofs of work to Bitcoind that are
> so
