Re: [bitcoin-dev] Quadratic hashing solution for a post-segwit hard fork
Yeah, it does make things harder, and it's easy enough to soft fork to handle arbitrary opt-in protocol improvements, new much larger block sizes, whatever you want. Even OK to migrate to a new system by not allowing old->old or new->old transactions. ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Quadratic hashing solution for a post-segwit hard fork
This unnecessarily complicates transaction selection for miners by introducing a second (and possibly third if I understand your proposal correctly) dimension to try to optimize. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_packing_problem Segwit already solves this exact issue by replacing block size with block weight, so I fail to see how this proposal would make any improvements without introducing significant complications. ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Committed bloom filters for improved wallet performance and SPV security
On 3/15/2017 5:25 PM, b...@cock.lu wrote: > compact fraud proofs in Bitcoin aren't possible > In the white paper SPV clients have the same security as fully > validating nodes In addition to not existing, if compact fraud proofs did exist, trying to ensure they are seen by SPV clients has the same problems as BIP37. > in the implementation of BIP37 they have absolutely no security except > the vague hope that they are not being lied to, and that the chain > with the most work they are seeing is actually valid, both are very > weak assumptions. Since real money is involved, the near total absence of documented fraud along these lines belies the strong language. > During the validationless mining failure around the BIP66 activation > miners produced 6 invalid blocks in a chain, and many more invalid > blocks in isolated bursts for a period lasting several months. Due to > the instability of the network you are completely unreasonable to > accept anything except multiple confirmations This affected all users, not just SPV. ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
