Re: [bitcoin-dev] This thread is not about the soft/hard fork technical debate

2015-10-06 Thread Venzen Khaosan via bitcoin-dev
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Tell you what, eloquent guy... Give me 15 minutes in a public open mic session with you and i'll remove you from your high horse and close your voice in Bitcoin, for good. Guaranteed. You're too stupid for me to let you run loose with client funds

Re: [bitcoin-dev] This thread is not about the soft/hard fork technical debate

2015-10-06 Thread Venzen Khaosan via bitcoin-dev
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 That's for Mike Hearn. Sooner the better. Hong Kong, December? Venzen Khaosan On 10/07/2015 01:23 AM, Venzen Khaosan via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Tell you what, eloquent guy... > > Give me 15 minutes in a public open mic session with you and i'll >

Re: [bitcoin-dev] This thread is not about the soft/hard fork technical debate

2015-10-06 Thread naama.kates--- via bitcoin-dev
Hey all, nice to meet you... I'm new to the community and thus, after taking that first step of signing up, have been reading/scanning these threads over the last few days without contributing my own two ยข-- not, um, 'trolling', just, you know, educating myself and getting familiar with the

Re: [bitcoin-dev] This thread is not about the soft/hard fork technical debate

2015-10-06 Thread Milly Bitcoin via bitcoin-dev
This list is about "Development discussion list for Bitcoin protocol and its implementation" So legal notices placed on the software is relevant to the list. It is also relevant that you go around speaking with authority when you have no idea what you are talking about. A copyright is a

Re: [bitcoin-dev] This thread is not about the soft/hard fork technical debate

2015-10-06 Thread Eric Lombrozo via bitcoin-dev
I prefer the term "clown". Can we please move on? -- Original Message -- From: "cipher anthem via bitcoin-dev" To: mi...@bitcoins.info Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Sent: 10/6/2015 12:17:14 AM Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] This thread

Re: [bitcoin-dev] This thread is not about the soft/hard fork technical debate

2015-10-06 Thread naama.kates--- via bitcoin-dev
Just read the proposal for the dual modes... Think it would be best... Protocol question? Do we discuss the algorithms here on this forum? Or... Sorry again for my thick skull! Nina K Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 6, 2015, at 1:34 AM, NotMike Hearn via bitcoin-dev >

Re: [bitcoin-dev] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - We need more usecases to motivate the change

2015-10-06 Thread Joseph Poon via bitcoin-dev
Hi Peter, On Sat, Oct 03, 2015 at 04:30:56PM +0200, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote: > So we need to make the case for two main things: > > 1) We have applications that need a relative (instead of absolute CLTV) Lightning network needs RCLTV for bidireciontal payment channels without an

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin network simulation testing?

2015-10-06 Thread naama.kates--- via bitcoin-dev
Hi Byron, I've been using shadow a bit-- I think these simulators are important for testing, but Shadow, at least, certainly seems to have limitations, in some crucial respects. Running shadow w Tor (which is only logical, because many BCT transactions transpire over Tor) is not as 'light'

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin network simulation testing?

2015-10-06 Thread Andrew Miller via bitcoin-dev
Shadow uses virtual time, entirely decoupled from real time. So while it may slow down your machine, this would not affect the stats collected (although it does make shadow somewhat unpleasant to run, unless you have a fast machine, compared to abstract simulators that avoid running the actual

Re: [bitcoin-dev] This thread is not about the soft/hard fork technical debate

2015-10-06 Thread phm via bitcoin-dev
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 In any case this is basically the purpose of version tracking software such as Git or CVS or any other. It would not be hard to figure out who had done what. I see you're splitting hairs over nothing as usual, though, Russ, so I'll leave you to it.

Re: [bitcoin-dev] This thread is not about the soft/hard fork technical debate

2015-10-06 Thread NotMike Hearn via bitcoin-dev
I think I can solve the debate and give everyone what they want. Some people want BIP65, others do not. We can roll out 65 in a clever way, such that Greg/PeterT can get it, but Mike and Peter R don't need to have it (both versions can run alongside each other). Even better, people can switch

Re: [bitcoin-dev] This thread is not about the soft/hard fork technical debate

2015-10-06 Thread Venzen Khaosan via bitcoin-dev
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Sergio Demain, You and I have had our altercation, in private, about your assumptions of authority in this community. That was fine when you told me "for fuck's sake" on IRC. I'm a man and I made you see your error and apologize for your trespass.