Multi-sig requires infrastructure. It isn't a magic wand that we can
wave to make everyone secure. The protocols and techniques necessary
don't exist yet, and apparently no one has much of an incentive to
I mean no offense, and I don't mean to pick on you. Your post stuck out
Matt Whitlock wrote:
The creation date in your BIP header has the wrong format. It should be
01-04-2014, per BIP 1.
At first, I thought this was a second April Fool's joke, but then I
looked and saw that all of the BIPs really do use this format. As far
as I can tell, we are using this
Troy Benjegerdes wrote:
Mark Friedenbach wrote:
Bitcoin is not a centralized system, and neither is its development. I
don't even know how to respond to that. Bringing up altchains is a total
This is *bitcoin*-development. Please don't make it have to become a
I was trying to use bip10 for multisig and coinjoin, but there was a
problem with it. I'll have to look back at my notes, but I thought I
sent you a message about it. And then real life swallowed my bitcoin time...
I think the bottom line was that it would be useful in the generic case
Ryan Carboni wrote:
And the economic parameters of bitcoin are not fixed in stone. If
there needs to be a change, it will be messy but it could happen.
Need is an awfully big word. One thing we are certain of is that some
guy telling us all that we are wrong is nowhere near the need level.
Ryan Carboni wrote:
Bitcoin lacks a Central Bank.
This is a feature, not a bug.
Also, this is offtopic. Political debate is thataway -.
bitcoin-development is for development and technical discussion.
After reading all 99 messages in this thread, I think allowfee is just
It effectively lets merchants to give an allowance against the purchase
price for network fees, if they choose. It is still up to the sender
(and/or the sender's software) to get the fees right. Sometimes
Any reason not to use actual HTTP codes? I'm not aware of any major
deficiency in them. Most of them won't apply to us, which is fine, they
don't seem to apply to HTTP either. We can extend the scheme on our own
if we find a good reason to.
That implies 16 bits, or a varint. I would avoid
The HTTP status code system seems to work well enough, and seems to give
the best of both worlds. A 3 digit numeric code that is
machine-readable, and a freeform text note for humans.
The clever part about that system was in realizing that the numeric
codes didn't need to account for every
Mail list logo