📅 Original date posted:2015-09-01
📝 Original message:On 2015-09-01 15:59, Dave Collins via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I'd be interested to know about these supposed btcd mainnet forks that
> have occurred due to a consensus failure since it came out of alpha.
> I'll go ahead and save you some research time - there hasn't been one.
> I'm not claiming there will never be one as that would be just as
> foolish as claiming Bitcoin Core won't have any more either.
>
For the purposes of the conversation this was only brought up to re-
enforce my claim that this is outrageously difficult software
development, irrespective of the quality of the code being produced in
alternate implementations. Sorry if that came across as an attack
against your software in particular, it wasn't intended.
> On the other hand, Bitcoin Core has had actual forks on mainnet during
> the same period. I'm not casting stones at Bitcoin Core here, because
> as I've said many times, none of us are perfect. No matter how careful
> everyone is, it is bound to happen from time to time.
>
The point I was trying to make is that this is simply a hard
development situation to be working in, we don't know what behavior is
inferred by the use of CPP and even more so OpenSSL (as the DER
encoding consensus failure made abundantly clear). There's almost
certainly more problems lying around given how generally dusty a lot
of the transaction environment is, it's very easy to get off the
beaten track with Bitcoin script.
Monarch [ARCHIVE] /
npub165…sale4
2023-06-07 17:38:47
in reply to nevent1q…3uu3
Author Public Key
npub165cz97uf69xr6av492gc8pq6t4cjnh4fxlzplv7g68cvx3jwqgrsasale4Published at
2023-06-07 17:38:47Event JSON
{
"id": "f6e4cdbf87f477edeb08022f97b754cc48c5ce5db1815130b90a9b7cf1069ccf",
"pubkey": "d53022fb89d14c3d75952a9183841a5d7129dea937c41fb3c8d1f0c3464e0207",
"created_at": 1686159527,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"111acac704f23dc3e472de75beb22b999735d7f4efd059a37ae0454e185bc534",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"16045458ad0e64cb35045d7b6a6fc5283130dc15a6c2a86504ef31e21382ca2b",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a457a340ff30a8496e56a6982dc145640e765680c451a321f6cfc4620d8657e3"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-09-01\n📝 Original message:On 2015-09-01 15:59, Dave Collins via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e I'd be interested to know about these supposed btcd mainnet forks that\n\u003e have occurred due to a consensus failure since it came out of alpha.\n\u003e I'll go ahead and save you some research time - there hasn't been one.\n\u003e I'm not claiming there will never be one as that would be just as\n\u003e foolish as claiming Bitcoin Core won't have any more either.\n\u003e \n\nFor the purposes of the conversation this was only brought up to re-\nenforce my claim that this is outrageously difficult software\ndevelopment, irrespective of the quality of the code being produced in\nalternate implementations. Sorry if that came across as an attack\nagainst your software in particular, it wasn't intended.\n\n\n\u003e On the other hand, Bitcoin Core has had actual forks on mainnet during\n\u003e the same period. I'm not casting stones at Bitcoin Core here, because\n\u003e as I've said many times, none of us are perfect. No matter how careful\n\u003e everyone is, it is bound to happen from time to time.\n\u003e \n\nThe point I was trying to make is that this is simply a hard\ndevelopment situation to be working in, we don't know what behavior is\ninferred by the use of CPP and even more so OpenSSL (as the DER\nencoding consensus failure made abundantly clear). There's almost\ncertainly more problems lying around given how generally dusty a lot\nof the transaction environment is, it's very easy to get off the\nbeaten track with Bitcoin script.",
"sig": "7d7bb191506b47ed674a5316c1dcf77d3b6cba19b9cc566ec654d600c06f5fd59d935823b212f94b91a0b1dfcc8d07b92f48a9ed5318c95ebdec968f2884999d"
}