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
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
|
Return-Path: <eric@voskuil.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88082BB3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 7 Mar 2017 18:13:39 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pg0-f48.google.com (mail-pg0-f48.google.com [74.125.83.48])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2253178
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 7 Mar 2017 18:13:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pg0-f48.google.com with SMTP id 77so3205697pgc.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 07 Mar 2017 10:13:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to;
bh=nQYsOt3i4gTYPIILIbLwgmTAJRKrp2XI1MafDkD9T+0=;
b=pFpEU9cRWtMOh4KcVpQR0WhU4RvseTePzaeDNVzou/w5GpkVTsdw/xjYdCFZUxxySt
0RttY+sA8cBygXMFwhQkNdbvAR9Bywy+2I+PXI+uEl3+JBVimFLx6aoWSPIHocNxu7dB
eeZ47EmiKMWvybXiKaofgmb42Q1Hiu4VdrrcqU1TcwNVETEwBDsePktUSWvUZ8fN/jH5
tA4vcNz7Ddh5C26nR2VaX0yhl7crm6RLx3W2EkcXvVPwzWQa8G6KK6fJjs2ybjfSR3+K
9EGIwheV2x8RaL/PUdH+NMW2yBQLorcCzGcI3F77YLzJ/QbXaRp/iBSb/uWDouHR/B3h
DyiQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to;
bh=nQYsOt3i4gTYPIILIbLwgmTAJRKrp2XI1MafDkD9T+0=;
b=TVf3wcs5l0/K9WODTa3mXktSrzWW2sDcEzFxETxBx+U1JR0S0NsIQdmNXRqp5AOm9V
9qcRztYsJJ4TatyFp7/V5JJmt77XzVH8x//4oDqVkw9EICo2b/xoYfcr9qQFYa2SXGVN
ZO8U164ilqcXZNLweKX1/NnNfLOkxKfq+XCH3rXxNnPyTmSJTsd3BJLZ1W1wtafyzZAF
csdbCtPK0xKi8TyGG9HDsqDp5Vkyj+fFr7lf0VW0CHNo4ZTI376fUwWKhSND3F+1fFFg
1O7cB4SeRzv2BBvyb9BekzieOf2LSFREcHCXavE+WgpPFfVQ9tHcFnPv/oe+0emrbiQV
OSXQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lK7aTYidYh01NXwmiEFoqoT8dBWKUUB+sSZQrwnZZCYw/OBnhheEJehetPzOXX5g==
X-Received: by 10.84.149.102 with SMTP id b35mr2297603plh.3.1488910418505;
Tue, 07 Mar 2017 10:13:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.214.35.120] (mobile-166-176-184-131.mycingular.net.
[166.176.184.131])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 80sm1154864pgd.39.2017.03.07.10.13.37
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Tue, 07 Mar 2017 10:13:37 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (14D27)
In-Reply-To: <9086552.5NYgjOP6f4@strawberry>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 10:13:36 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <08254322-D7BC-4BF8-ACB2-189588D93325@voskuil.org>
References: <0ba5bf9c-5578-98ce-07ae-036d0d71046b@riseup.net>
<CA+su7OV0Cpe=4AKdNhJXOCbYVriEN1vHSoA_0r31GXCAP1=NCA@mail.gmail.com>
<964E4801-234F-4E30-A040-2C63274D27F2@posteo.net>
<9086552.5NYgjOP6f4@strawberry>
To: Tom Zander <tomz@freedommail.ch>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,MIME_QP_LONG_LINE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM
autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 18:22:27 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Moving towards user activated soft fork activation
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 18:13:39 -0000
> Bitcoin would lose the security and in the short term even the ability to=20=
mine blocks every 10 minutes.
Presumably a POW hard fork would be accompanied by a difficulty reset, so th=
at the deployment didn't have *both* of these problems from the outset. The=
re's really little difference between 10 minutes at little/no security and z=
ero conf. See testnet. But people might feel better about still seeing block=
s.
But in any case it's not clear to me why you assume a loss of security in th=
e "short term" is something that can be overcome. The short term can presuma=
bly prevent the long term from ever becoming.
e
> On Mar 7, 2017, at 1:17 AM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.=
linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>=20
>> On Tuesday, 7 March 2017 00:23:47 CET Gareth Williams via bitcoin-dev wro=
te:
>> What you're describing is a hashpower activated soft fork to censor
>> transactions, in response to a user activated soft fork that the majority=
>> of hashpower disagrees with.
>=20
> It is incorrect to say that censoring of transactions is what Edmund=20
> suggested. It's purely about the form they take, you can re-send the=20
> transaction in a different form with the same content and they go through.=
=20
> Hence, not transaction censoring.
>=20
> I do believe the point that Edmund brought up is a very good one, the idea=
=20
> that a set of users can force the miners to do something is rather silly a=
nd=20
> the setup that a minority miner fraction can force the majority to do=20
> something is equally silly. This is because the majority mining hashpower=20=
> can fight back against this attack upon them.
>=20
> Don=E2=80=99t be mistaken; a hash-minority attacking the hash-majority is i=
n actual=20
> fact an attack upon Bitcoin as a whole.
> If this were possible then next year we=E2=80=99d see governments try to p=
ush=20
> through changes in the same UASF way. I=E2=80=99m very happy that UASFs ca=
n=E2=80=99t work=20
> because that would be the end of Bitcoin's freedom and decentralized natur=
e.
>=20
>> It is always possible for a majority of hashpower to censor transactions
>> they disagree with. Users may view that as an attack, and can always
>> respond with a POW hard fork.
>=20
> I definitely welcome that approach.
>=20
> The result would be that you have two chains, but also you ensure that the=
=20
> chain that the miners didn=E2=80=99t like will no longer be something they=
can mine.=20
> Not even the minority set of miners that like the softfork can mine on it.=
=20
> This is a win-win and then the market will decide which one will "win".
>=20
>> Bitcoin only works if the majority of hashpower is not hostile to the
>> users.
>=20
> This goes both ways, miners both generate value (in the form of security)=20=
> and they take value (in the form of inflation).
> If the majority of the users are hostile and reject blocks that the miners=
=20
> create, or change the POW, then what the miners bring to the table is also=
=20
> removed.
> Bitcoin would lose the security and in the short term even the ability to=20=
> mine blocks every 10 minutes.
>=20
> So, lets correct your statement a little;
> =C2=ABBitcoin only works when the majority of the hashpower and the (econo=
mic)
> majority of the users are balanced in power and have their goals aligned.=
=C2=BB
>=20
> --=20
> Tom Zander
> Blog: https://zander.github.io
> Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
|
