From: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32•com>
To: John Carvalho <john@synonym•to>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Opt-in full-RBF] Zero-conf apps in immediate danger (angus)
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 16:14:03 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJowKgJQJvsZQgTjEqXaz6DVw_iG4JfXCL8s0G7v2o3O453Ajg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHTn92wri-edhivrtqZCoEzAPEmwZFap12mM4yzxgp77O-+JYA@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1506 bytes --]
>
>
>
> Many zero-conf proponents work on the bleeding edge of supporting
> Lightning, including myself. Lightning is not risk-free and the base layer
> should not be assuming it as a primary dependency for commercial payments.
>
for low-value payments, lightning is the only workable version because the
current low-fee environment is not scalable and never will be
for high valued payments, zero conf was never valuable or useful and never
can be - it was always the beneficence of users you are relying on low
fee/high fee double spends of a zero conf with no rbf flag has
been demonstrated, repeatedly ad nauseum.
... so there is no long term scenario where zero conf is valuable.
right *now* with low fees it might "seem nice", but really it just
incentivises network-wide surveillance, increased peer burden on nodes, and
unsustainable practices that are akin to a "mev" bounty hanging over
merchant's heads.
also, i've been using bitcoin for years without zero conf. selling and
buying online. operating merchants with millions in transactions. the
20 minute wait before i ship is meaningless, and the only risk i take on is
that a user replaces a transaction with a different destination. which
i've never observed. even with the flag on (which i dont care about, and
never have).
and if i do observe it ... i just won't ship. it was easy to code up.
the user will have to initiate a new tx. i have no objection to a user
being able to cancel their order. why would i?
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1998 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-05 21:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <mailman.48662.1670246787.956.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
2022-12-05 15:19 ` John Carvalho
2022-12-05 21:14 ` Erik Aronesty [this message]
2022-12-09 15:58 ` angus
2022-12-13 12:55 ` Anthony Towns
2022-12-12 2:27 ` ZmnSCPxj
2022-12-12 9:57 ` John Carvalho
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=CAJowKgJQJvsZQgTjEqXaz6DVw_iG4JfXCL8s0G7v2o3O453Ajg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=erik@q32$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=john@synonym$(echo .)to \
/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