Re: [bitcoin-dev] Significant losses by double-spending unconfirmed transactions

> minrelaytxfee setting proposed in the 0.11.0 release notes my guess, he is talking about this https://bitcoin.org/en/glossary/minimum-relay-fee - slam dunk technique for doublespend > Related: is there somewhere a chart that plots `estima

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Significant losses by double-spending unconfirmed transactions

AM, Pieter Wuille wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Me via bitcoin-dev > <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote: > Have you talk to them? If not, how can you be sure they don’t run large > number of standard nodes and actually make the network

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Significant losses by double-spending unconfirmed transactions

Have you talk to them? If not, how can you be sure they don’t run large number of standard nodes and actually make the network stronger? Personally I never bring claims like this if I just assume. A lot of people in the community really trust you, do you realize you potentially hurt them for no

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Significant losses by double-spending unconfirmed transactions

Thank you Simon for sharing your tests, if possible can you share TX hashes please. I would recommend to send them money post-mortem. What you did is really valuable information, however it can be classified as fraud. I really don’t want open this topic here, just suggesting to keep your record