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

[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 
>  wrote:
> 
> 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 back and forth between versions as 
> much as they like.
> 
> How might this work? Well, paradoxically, we could do this by *imposing 
> additional constraints* on transaction validation, such that transactions 
> made a very specific certain way will always look valid to non-CLTVers, but 
> for CLTVers they will not be valid unless the CLTV rules are followed. The 
> obvious concern is that non-CLTV people might receive invalid payments. 
> However, their software is already set up to request payments in a non-CLTV 
> way, so, luckily, this is actually not a problem at all! SPV clients can 
> elect to only connect to nodes which are non-CLTV.
> 
> Problem solved!
> 
> I am happy to have solved this problem for you all, and ended this discord 
> harmoniously. If we all put our heads together, these words of founding 
> father Aretha Franklin will ring true: "there's nothing we can't overcome".
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:29 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev 
>>  wrote:
>> This is childish and very disappointing to see.
>> 
>> 2015-10-06 9:20 GMT+02:00 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 is not about the soft/hard fork 
>>> technical debate
>>> 
>  Sent: Monday, October 05, 2015 at 8:21 PM
>  From: "Milly Bitcoin via bitcoin-dev" 
> 
>  To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>  Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] This thread is not about the soft/hard fork 
> technical debate
>>  On 10/5/2015 4:05 PM, Steven Pine via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>>  It's pretty clear Mike has turned into concern troll and bully.
 
>  "troll" and, even worse, "concern troll" are terms generally used by
>  teenagers on places like Reddit to complain about someone who doesn't
>  agree with them.
 
 They should substitute troll for cultist so they appear more 
 professional...
 ___
 bitcoin-dev mailing list
 bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
 https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> 
> ___
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
___
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

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

[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' as presented and slows 
my own box down quite a bit, so the stats can't possibly be accurate... I don't 
know if this answers any questions or if you've had this experience at all -- 
perhaps it is negligible on a more powerful machine than my own-- or perhaps 
there is an adjustment still unaccounted?

Regards,
Nina K

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 4, 2015, at 2:04 PM, Byron Gibson via bitcoin-dev 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi all, is anyone using simulators like Shadow (https://shadow.github.io), 
> BTCSim (https://github.com/btcsuite/btcsim), etc. to test proposed changes to 
> Bitcoin?  I have a few questions about their capabilities and limitations.
> 
> Byron Gibson
> http://mirror.co/
> https://keybase.io/byrongibson
> 
>
> 
> ___
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
___
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev