Hash: SHA256

On 21 February 2015 17:47:28 GMT-05:00, Jeff Garzik <jgar...@bitpay.com> wrote:
>"scorched earth" refers to the _real world_ impact such policies would
>have on present-day 0-conf usage within the bitcoin community.

I think you guys are reading too much into the name... Replace-by-fee is called 
"replace-by-fee" because it considers whether to replace or not based on fee; 
the idea came about in an discussion about replacement based on nSequence.

I forget whether it was myself or John Dillon who came up with the name 
"scorched earth", but it just refers to the game theory behind the *specific* 
idea of the receiver combating a zeroconf double-spend by sending all the funds 
to fees. Scorched earth as in "You're trying to defraud me, so I'm not going yo 
play this game or negotiate, I'm just going to immediately do what is most 
likely to make you lose the maximum amount of money to punish you for your 

>All payment processors AFAIK process transactions through some scoring
>system, then accept 0-conf transactions for payments.
>This isn't some theoretical exercise.  Like it or not many use
>insecure 0-conf transactions for rapid payments.  Deploying something
>that makes 0-conf transactions unusable would have a wide, negative
>impact on present day bitcoin payments, thus "scorched earth"

I'm not so convinced, precisely because we've seen zeroconf fail in pretty bad 
ways; the people most vulnerable to losses have generally changed the way they 
operate. (e.g. ATM's that no longer rely on zeroconf security, instead waiting 
for confirmations, installing cameras, etc.)

My #1 concern right now is person-to-person trading, and people doing that tend 
to wait for confirmations or otherwise protect themselves. (e.g. reputation 

>Without adequate decentralized solutions for instant payments,
>deploying replace-by-fee widely would simply push instant transactions
>even more into the realm of centralized, walled-garden services.

Agreed. Deploying it has been something I've made into a long, drawn out, 
protracted process for precisely that reason. OTOH I sometimes wonder if I've 
gone too far with that - the services that themselves try to guarantee zeroconf 
right now through metrics are themselves highly centralised, and there's a big 
risk of them driving mining centralisation itself when they fail.


Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server
from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards
with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more
Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE
Bitcoin-development mailing list

Reply via email to