I think Jorge's request for specifics is reasonable. I agree that we
can raise the level of discussion. Each claim about how good or bad a
specific BIP is should say why on the technical merits. Comments on
prior claims may expose misinformation, expose "trust me" authority,
or point out other
Hi Suhas/Gloria,
Good questions. I've started a new thread because it became something else...
Various ideas about packaging seem to be focused on the idea of an atomic
message that is gossiped around the network like a transaction or block. From
my perspective that seems to create a set of
Who do you mean by "the non technical folks"?
You don't include alicexbt or yourself as a "technical folk", do you?
On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 8:38 AM Billy Tetrud via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Wholeheartedly agree with you alicexbt. There are no technical issues
Hi,
Thanks again for your work on this!
One question I have is about potential bandwidth waste in the case of nodes
running with different policy rules. Here's my understanding of a scenario
I think could happen:
1) Transaction A is both low-fee and non-standard to some nodes on the
network.
Wholeheartedly agree with you alicexbt. There are no technical issues that
have been shown that I'm aware of. Once the non-technical folks have time
to discuss it and realize that, I'm hopeful things will move forward.
Perhaps we can learn from this and figure out how to better catch the
attention
That sounds like an interesting mechanism to help measure consensus - and a
good way to do that would help bitcoin significantly I think. I don't quite
see what the similarity is between Trust Metric and bitcoin tho. How
would you propose "building it into" bitcoin?
>From my limited searching, it
