Hi, bitcoin devs. I'm working at lbry.io and we stay closely to your core,
i want to discuss what you think about a contribution like:
base_blob and/or base_uint to be derived from std::array to be enabled move
semantics, as well on uint160, uint256, COutPoint.
Another approach that bother me is
Good morning Adam,
> And I'm reminded that a related point is made by belcher in the gist
> comment thread iirc (after we discussed it on IRC): over time a
> "PayJoin-only" merchant doing the simplest thing - using a single utxo
> over and over again, will concentrate more and more funds into it,
On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 6:06 PM, James MacWhyte
wrote:
> I'm not convinced this is a valid concern, at least not valid enough to add
> extra complications to the process.
Signing a transaction is something a wallet needs to be able to do anyway AND
at the final-step. And actually a
James
On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 2:11 PM wrote:
>
> It isn't passed "back and forth so many times".
>
You are right, I got the wrong impression the first time I read it.
> This is an important anti-DoS/anti-spy tactic, as it proves the sender
> actually owns those inputs and if the protocol is
