From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
To: shaolinfry <shaolinfry@protonmail•ch>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Barry Silbert segwit agreement
Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 02:27:04 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170522062704.GA29930@savin.petertodd.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2zSehquWdVTgHhfHfQpAHZTGAyzv-XFias7rRsns0j6TpJryz6Fyvst3N0v_2_Q3KsYiyRn9qd9Gb1QLUxh5F11RAlVmvezYN8d4m8q5F-A=@protonmail.ch>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1167 bytes --]
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 02:12:08AM -0400, shaolinfry via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Someone sent me a copy of the Barry Silbert agreement, an agreement forged between a select number of participants https://pastebin.com/VuCYteJh
It's interesting how changing the bit used to signal could be used as a way to
try to trick people into changing node software ASAP to support the hard-fork
code. Basically, the narrative would be that other software *doesn't* support
segwit, so you have to upgrade right away.
> A fourth option, first suggested to me by James Hilliard, was to make BIP148 miner triggered (MASF) with a lower threshold, above 50%. I coded this up a few weeks ago https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/master...shaolinfry:segsignal but didnt get around to posting to the ML yet. This effectively lowers the threshold from 95% to 65% as coded, or could be upped to 80% or whatever was preferable.
In contrast this proposal wouldn't have that effect, because as you point out
it's compatibel with the existing segwit protocol once activated.
Smells like political engineering to me.
--
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 455 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-22 6:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-22 6:12 shaolinfry
2017-05-22 6:27 ` Peter Todd [this message]
2017-05-22 9:23 ` Hampus Sjöberg
2017-05-22 12:29 Daniele Pinna
2017-05-26 17:47 Jacob Eliosoff
2017-05-26 18:48 ` Tom Zander
2017-05-26 20:02 ` Matt Corallo
2017-05-26 20:10 ` Jacob Eliosoff
2017-05-26 21:30 ` James Hilliard
2017-05-26 22:12 ` Tom Zander
[not found] ` <CADvTj4qdr2yGYFEWA7oVmL-KkrchYb5aQBRY9w0OK4ZVopSTSA@mail.gmail.com>
2017-05-28 20:51 ` Tom Zander
2017-05-28 23:28 ` James Hilliard
2017-05-26 22:44 ` Matt Corallo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170522062704.GA29930@savin.petertodd.org \
--to=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=shaolinfry@protonmail$(echo .)ch \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox