Re: [bitcoin-dev] Pull-req to enable Full-RBF by default

2023-08-01 Thread Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev
On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 01:27:24AM +0300, Daniel Lipshitz wrote: > Your research is not thorough and reaches an incorrect conclusion. > > As stated many times - we service payment processors and some merchants > directly - Coinspaid services multiple merchants and process a > significant amount

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Pull-req to enable Full-RBF by default

2023-08-01 Thread Daniel Lipshitz via bitcoin-dev
Your research is not thorough and reaches an incorrect conclusion. As stated many times - we service payment processors and some merchants directly - Coinspaid services multiple merchants and process a significant amount of BTC they are a well known and active in the space - as I provided back

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Announcing Libforesta

2023-08-01 Thread Bastiaan van den Berg via bitcoin-dev
Am i correct in the following interpretations? - the utreexo bridge peers are the only real bitcoin nodes - you cant use -only- libfloresta to be a node , you cant mine with it, you cant do normal tx with it - you are targetting webbrowsers ( , i'm really confused about the why of this) On

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Pull-req to enable Full-RBF by default

2023-08-01 Thread Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 01:26:11PM +0300, Daniel Lipshitz via bitcoin-dev wrote: > This would unnecessarily and extremely negatively impact merchants and > users who choose to accept 0-conf while using mitigation tools like GAP600. > This negative impact could be avoided by simply adding first