On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 09:14:03PM +0000, Luke-Jr wrote: > On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 9:06:44 PM Andy Parkins wrote: > > On Wednesday 13 Mar 2013 12:56:29 Luke-Jr wrote: > > > Here's a simple proposal to start discussion from... > > > > It seems to me that the biggest failure was not the development of two > > chains, but the assurance to users (by the client) that their transactions > > were confirmed. > > These are both the same thing.
The idea of the client detecting/warning about not-trivial forking seems worthwhile too, though, assuming it doesn't already (AIUI it doesn't). I don't know if there's any automatic monitoring for forks, but if not I would assume that the core devs and/or Bitcoin Foundation would be planning to put some in place. But there's no reason I can see why end users clients should't be warning of such situations, too, when they can (obviously they won't always be aware of the fork). roy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
