> look at how lightning ate up fees to keep bitcoin stable, we can't
"scale" too quickly either
I strongly disagree with this. We should be scaling Bitcoin as fast as we
can. There is no reason to delay scaling for the purposes of keeping fees
high. If we need fees to be higher, we can lower the
Goog morning ZmnSCPxj,
Context: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=48.msg329#msg329
Maybe I should have rephrased it and quote Satoshi. I agree I should not speak
for others and it was not my intention in the email.
> If Satoshi refuses to participate in Bitcoin development today, who
> Good morning Prayank,
>
> (offlist)
My apologies.
I pushed the wrong button, I should have pressed "Reply" and not "Reply All".
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
___
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Good morning,
> If this is the reason to stop/delay improvements in bitcoin, maybe it applies
> for Taproot as well although I don't remember reading such things in your
> posts or maybe missed it.
Perhaps a thing to note, is that if it allows us to move some activity
off-chain, and reduce
Good morning Prayank,
(offlist)
> Satoshi
I object to the invocation of Satoshi here, and in general.
If Satoshi wants to participate in Bitcoin development today, he can speak for
himself.
If Satoshi refuses to participate in Bitcoin development today, who cares what
his opinion is?
Satoshi
> note how ETH has quite high on chain fees for basic transactions,> because
> there are so many use-cases where the per-tx value can afford much> higher
> fees. That kind of expansion of use-case also arguably harms Bitcoin as> a
> whole by providing more fuel for a future contentious
> note how ETH has quite high on chain fees for basic transactions,
> because there are so many use-cases where the per-tx value can afford much
> higher fees. That kind of expansion of use-case also arguably harms
Bitcoin as
> a whole by providing more fuel for a future contentious blocksize
On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 02:57:30AM +0100, Prayank wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> > that current lacks compelling use-cases clearly beneficial to all users
>
> All the use cases shared in below links look compelling enough to me and we
> can do anything that a programmer could think of using such
Hi Peter,
> that current lacks compelling use-cases clearly beneficial to all users
All the use cases shared in below links look compelling enough to me and we can
do anything that a programmer could think of using such restrictions:
https://utxos.org/uses/
https://rubin.io/archive/
> I
Please see the following bips PRs which are follow ups to the concrete
actionables raised by Peter. Thanks for bringing these up, it certainly
improves the reviewability of the BIP.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1271
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1272
--
@JeremyRubin
Hi Peter,
Thank you for your review and feedback.
Apologies for the difficulties in reviewing. The branch linked from the BIP
is not the latest, the branch in the PR is what should be considered
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21702 for review and has more
thorough well documented tests
On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 02:05:20AM +, Michael Folkson via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> There have been a number of “soft signals”, many expressing enthusiasm for
> the speculated use cases of OP_CTV. Personally I share that enthusiasm like I
> do with the prospect of curing cancer. But these soft
> You are working on a use case of OP_CTV now?
I think I mentioned clearly what I would be doing: 1. Review pull request 2.
Create contracts with Sapio. This would help me review OP_CTV and learn new
things.
> Cool, you only recently announced you were working on Bitcoin Knots (and I
> think
You are working on a use case of OP_CTV now? Cool, you only recently announced
you were working on Bitcoin Knots (and I think Wasabi before that) so I'm
losing track of all the announcements. Regardless stick with it and build out
more than a rudimentary proof of concept. That is one of the
What I have done related to OP_CTV?
https://twitter.com/prayankgahlot/status/1456643891885592579
What am I currently working on that is not shared publicly and will do in next
few weeks?
Review pull request 21702 and write contracts using Sapio based on few ideas
that I already have.
What is
Hi Christian,
A few things are mentioned in these threads including unsolved research issues
in which you were tagged and Richard Myers had even replied so I am assuming
this is known:
https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin/status/1460349481518465025
> It should be ready to go in a few months IMO
What is this assessment based on? I am assuming you haven't done a code review
of the opcode, you haven't coded up a real world use case of OP_CTV (or even a
primitive proof of concept), you haven't thought about alternative proposals
for any
Prayank via bitcoin-dev writes:
>> To contrast with his approach, the authors and contributors of
>> another future soft fork proposal (BIP 118 [3], SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT)
>> aren’t promoting an imminent soft fork activation attempt and instead
>> are building out and testing one of the speculated
18 matches
Mail list logo
