Re: [Bitcoin-development] Lowering confirmation requirements and preventing double spends

2011-12-09 Thread Andy Parkins
On 2011 December 08 Thursday, Stefan Thomas wrote: > Bitcoin already does something which in practice has exactly this > effect: If a transaction is reversed, any transactions based on its > outputs are rejected. That part is fine; I was aware that Bitcoin did this. How could it not? The trans

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Lowering confirmation requirements and preventing double spends

2011-12-08 Thread Stefan Thomas
Hey Andy, Bitcoin already does something which in practice has exactly this effect: If a transaction is reversed, any transactions based on its outputs are rejected. Hosted wallets can make use of this - but as you correctly point out, depending on the service, it can get tricky. What if I exc

[Bitcoin-development] Lowering confirmation requirements and preventing double spends

2011-12-08 Thread Andy Parkins
Hello, Another of my crazy ideas: When a transaction is first broadcast, it should include the hash of the block it wants to appear after, let's call it's basis block. That block can be anything the claimer wants; but it allows the miners to add this condition: the transactions outputs a new