One key difference seems to be that properly punishing someone based on
mempool behavior seems much more difficult. As we all know there is no "the
mempool".
On Sun, Jun 26, 2022, 8:43 PM Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2022 at 04:40:
On June 27, 2022 8:03:38 AM EDT, Greg Sanders wrote:
>One key difference seems to be that properly punishing someone based on
>mempool behavior seems much more difficult. As we all know there is no "the
>mempool".
No, that's not relevant here: the DoS condition is the existence of a (mined)
d
Hi,
There have been attempts to create static payment codes that function as a way
for transacting parties to create "private" addresses, where private stands for
"known only to transacting parties". BIP47 was one such standard.
The standard suffered from a number of problems:
1. The standard
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 2:14 PM Alfred Hodler via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 2. Notification transactions still exist but no longer leave a privacy
> footprint on the blockchain. Instead, a notification transaction is simply
> a single OP_RETURN containing a
Hi Alfred,
Thanks for taking the time to write a proposal.
>The inability of payment codes to explicitly state which address types
they derive places a burden on more resource constrained wallets
I agree it's not as efficient as it could be, but how big is this problem
in practice? Expecting pay
Hi Bryan,
>just publishing on a tor hidden service that other wallets check
The problem is that this data is critical to access the funds. By putting
it on-chain you're guaranteeing that it's always available when you restore
your funds from backup.
Cheers,
Ruben
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 10:21 P
