That's a fair point, I confused anyone-can-spend with anyone-can-pay [1].

Isn't it different in the case of P2SH and SegWit, don't full nodes validate the script?

In other words, miners don't have complete control over the coins, full nodes keep a check on them.

At least that was my understanding, and if that's not the case then it doesn't make sense to me why Pieter would earlier in this thread object to Drivechain on the grounds that it's a different security model.

- Greg

[1] https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@jl777/bitcoin-spinoff-fork-how-to-make-a-clean-fork-without-any-replay-attack-and-no-blockchain-visible-changes

--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA.

On Jul 12, 2017, at 12:54 PM, CryptAxe via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

Are we just pulling numbers out of thin air now? https://p2sh.info/ BIP16 for example is widely used. It would be difficult to find a single wallet that doesn't support BIP16 I have no idea what you are talking about.


On 07/12/2017 12:42 PM, Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev wrote:
...
In the present situation, anyone-can-spend outputs are used by probably less than 0.1% of users, and most software doesn't even allow for the possibility.

In Drivechain it's *encouraged-by-design*!

- Greg

--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA.


_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev