📅 Original date posted:2015-06-06
📝 Original message:2015-06-06 17:32 GMT+02:00 Peter Todd <pete at petertodd.org>:
> On Sat, Jun 06, 2015 at 05:23:48PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Luke Dashjr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
>>
>> > I also agree with Pieter, that this should *not* be so cleanly compatible
>> > with Bitcoin transactions. If you wish to share code, perhaps using an
>> > invalid opcode rather than OP_RETURN would be appropriate.
>>
>>
>> Using an invalid opcode would merely send funds into the void. It wouldn't
>> invalidate the transaction.
>
> Just set nLockTime to 500000000-1 and nSequence appropriately to make
> the transaction impossible to mine for the next 9500 years.
Actually, I suggested that on this list on april 27, but shortly after
rejected my own idea:
#######################
"Or a really high lock_time, but it would not make it invalid, just delayed."
Ok, this was a bad idea, since nodes would have to keep it in memory.
Please disregard that idea...
########################
Now I think I rejected it on based on a misunderstanding. Nodes will
not put them in their mempool unless it's value is near in time,
right? From the 0.9.0 release notes: "Accept nLockTime transactions
that finalize in the next block".
In that case this is a really nice option.
>
> Though I agree that this whole idea seems a bit dubious to me.
>
> --
> 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
> 00000000000000000000dd919214b66444dcebb4aa0214c1ab7c8b3b633be71f
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
Kalle Rosenbaum [ARCHIVE] /
npub1uw…55zf7
2023-06-07 15:36:52
in reply to nevent1q…d3la
Author Public Key
npub1uwweecasakwtk96j3vjmkjenhnhyv4rku382txq0kmexjwuh4w2st55zf7Published at
2023-06-07 15:36:52Event JSON
{
"id": "fba8a1b2689050e43a54082833f9398b3b380dc8a3b1ca3cd73b6bdbc1f8c861",
"pubkey": "e39d9ce3b0ed9cbb17528b25bb4b33bcee465476e44ea5980fb6f2693b97ab95",
"created_at": 1686152212,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"e1766602ba0f6768319a1583d11fb84dd1782fa79b735d969ef1342e648fd1da",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"462cf283896e2c27134265ccb9e13e3b42bd7bb0ede94e7654f984616b718449",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"daa2fc676a25e3b5b45644540bcbd1e1168b111427cd0e3cf19c56194fb231aa"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-06-06\n📝 Original message:2015-06-06 17:32 GMT+02:00 Peter Todd \u003cpete at petertodd.org\u003e:\n\u003e On Sat, Jun 06, 2015 at 05:23:48PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote:\n\u003e\u003e On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Luke Dashjr \u003cluke at dashjr.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e \u003e I also agree with Pieter, that this should *not* be so cleanly compatible\n\u003e\u003e \u003e with Bitcoin transactions. If you wish to share code, perhaps using an\n\u003e\u003e \u003e invalid opcode rather than OP_RETURN would be appropriate.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Using an invalid opcode would merely send funds into the void. It wouldn't\n\u003e\u003e invalidate the transaction.\n\u003e\n\u003e Just set nLockTime to 500000000-1 and nSequence appropriately to make\n\u003e the transaction impossible to mine for the next 9500 years.\n\nActually, I suggested that on this list on april 27, but shortly after\nrejected my own idea:\n\n#######################\n\"Or a really high lock_time, but it would not make it invalid, just delayed.\"\n\nOk, this was a bad idea, since nodes would have to keep it in memory.\nPlease disregard that idea...\n########################\n\nNow I think I rejected it on based on a misunderstanding. Nodes will\nnot put them in their mempool unless it's value is near in time,\nright? From the 0.9.0 release notes: \"Accept nLockTime transactions\nthat finalize in the next block\".\n\nIn that case this is a really nice option.\n\n\u003e\n\u003e Though I agree that this whole idea seems a bit dubious to me.\n\u003e\n\u003e --\n\u003e 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org\n\u003e 00000000000000000000dd919214b66444dcebb4aa0214c1ab7c8b3b633be71f\n\u003e\n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\u003e",
"sig": "f99245e79af283f88568cfcd33cdcfc609bbcff59da045aa64fb781438a58499c3e3fe8bb562fde0943f08b789ca82aab83b71832ede9327936d84b36cd18767"
}