From: Robert Backhaus <robbak@robbak•com>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Double Spend Notification
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 18:08:04 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+i0-i8R7oVfFnrcsdZ2JbR_4q8H9O6aTnCV4MwTi=VdBnQb6g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgSfbKGp5Qe4_RQeSvU0Ay-=m3CncaiQ5LLrMBtx0z5Pmg@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1396 bytes --]
Not at all - ACK from me, fwiw. Any attempt at a double spend should be
shouted from the housetops.
What Miners should do with that is still up for debate, it seems. My
opinion is that they should hold on and attempt to confirm the first,
letting it go only if a conflicting transaction is mined elsewhere. (Let
your Yes mean Yes...) But I understand the contrary arguments.
On 21 May 2013 17:04, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail•com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail•com>
> wrote:
> > I'm very much in favor of double-spend propagation across the network.
>
> Absolutely.
>
> (to the list:) Is there anyone who is not? (assuming that it doesn't
> allow arbitrary traffic multiplication, which is easily solved)
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt
> New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service
> that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your
> browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic
> and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_may
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2141 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-21 8:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-21 0:45 Quinn Harris
2013-05-21 1:24 ` Robert Backhaus
2013-05-21 1:56 ` Pieter Wuille
2013-05-21 3:27 ` Mike Hearn
2013-05-21 3:39 ` Robert Backhaus
2013-05-21 13:06 ` Peter Todd
2013-05-21 3:54 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-05-21 4:39 ` Gavin Andresen
2013-05-21 7:04 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-05-21 8:08 ` Robert Backhaus [this message]
2013-05-21 13:05 ` Peter Todd
2013-05-21 14:26 ` David Vorick
2013-05-21 16:47 ` Quinn Harris
2013-05-21 3:46 ` Quinn Harris
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='CA+i0-i8R7oVfFnrcsdZ2JbR_4q8H9O6aTnCV4MwTi=VdBnQb6g@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=robbak@robbak$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
/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