On 2/11/2015 10:47 PM, Peter Todd wrote: > ... replace-by-fee ... Replace-by-fee creates the power to repudiate an entire tree of payments, and hands this power individually to the owner of each input to the top transaction. Presumably this is why the original replacement code at least required that all of the same inputs be spent, even if the original outputs got jilted.
Replace-by-fee strengthens the existing *incentive discontinuity* at 1-conf, and shouts it from the rooftops. There is diffraction around hard edges. Expect more Finney attacks, even paid ones, if replace-by-fee becomes common. Regardless of how reliable 0-conf can ever be (much more reliable than today imho), discontinuities are very undesirable. There is no money in mining other people's double-spends. Miners of all sizes would welcome a fair way to reduce them to improve the quality of the currency, whether or not that way is DSDW. You mischaracterize DSDW as being in any way trust- or vote-based. It is based on statistics, which is bitcoin-esque to the core. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
