📅 Original date posted:2022-04-21
📝 Original message:On Thursday 21 April 2022 06:20:15 Jeremy Rubin wrote:
> > While reverting Segwit wouldn't be possible, it IS entirely possible to
> > do an additional softfork to either weigh witness data at the full 4
> > WU/Byte rate (same as other data), or to reduce the total weight limit so
> > as to extend the witness discount to non-segwit transactions (so scriptSig
> > is similarly discounted).
>
> What if I pre signed a transaction which was valid under the discounted
> weighting, but the increase in weight would make it invalid? This would
> serve to confiscate funds. Let's not do that.
You'd be confiscating your own funds by making an absurd spending condition.
By this argument, ALL softforks would have to be ruled out.
> > Furthermore, the variant of Speedy Trial being used (AFAIK) is the BIP9
> > variant which has no purpose other than to try to sabotage parallel UASF
> > efforts.
>
> Why didn't you upstream the code that was used for the actual activation
> into Bitcoin Core in the last year?
>
> In preparing it I just used what was available in Core now, surely the last
> year you could have gotten the appropriate patches done?
They were done, reviewed, and deployed in time for Taproot. You personally
played a part in sabotaging efforts to get it merged into Core, and violating
the community's trust in it by instead merging your BIP9 ST without
consensus. Don't play dumb. You have nobody to blame but yourself.
Luke
Luke Dashjr [ARCHIVE] /
npub1tf…rfq0n
2023-06-07 23:07:35
in reply to nevent1q…5vmq
Author Public Key
npub1tfk373zg9dnmtvxnpnq7s2dkdgj37rwfj3yrwld7830qltmv8qps8rfq0nPublished at
2023-06-07 23:07:35Event JSON
{
"id": "ad02752f7f90798170201e8a1d49ca6f315c2db4b51f4cc52955cf921bf59f13",
"pubkey": "5a6d1f44482b67b5b0d30cc1e829b66a251f0dc99448377dbe3c5e0faf6c3803",
"created_at": 1686179255,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"3199d7e373413debbd60986222963e0a7995231a8bea9719310656b98185e004",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"841c9f3d29c42c0beac85ce9a00ae42bd254d09f416d3b50405ddf2894714731",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"372c316761360b4ea20f2d7e81a59363b7e45b8e945a5381c3122049c2c4b84a"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2022-04-21\n📝 Original message:On Thursday 21 April 2022 06:20:15 Jeremy Rubin wrote:\n\u003e \u003e While reverting Segwit wouldn't be possible, it IS entirely possible to\n\u003e \u003e do an additional softfork to either weigh witness data at the full 4\n\u003e \u003e WU/Byte rate (same as other data), or to reduce the total weight limit so\n\u003e \u003e as to extend the witness discount to non-segwit transactions (so scriptSig\n\u003e \u003e is similarly discounted).\n\u003e\n\u003e What if I pre signed a transaction which was valid under the discounted\n\u003e weighting, but the increase in weight would make it invalid? This would\n\u003e serve to confiscate funds. Let's not do that.\n\nYou'd be confiscating your own funds by making an absurd spending condition.\nBy this argument, ALL softforks would have to be ruled out.\n\n\u003e \u003e Furthermore, the variant of Speedy Trial being used (AFAIK) is the BIP9\n\u003e \u003e variant which has no purpose other than to try to sabotage parallel UASF\n\u003e \u003e efforts.\n\u003e\n\u003e Why didn't you upstream the code that was used for the actual activation\n\u003e into Bitcoin Core in the last year?\n\u003e\n\u003e In preparing it I just used what was available in Core now, surely the last\n\u003e year you could have gotten the appropriate patches done?\n\nThey were done, reviewed, and deployed in time for Taproot. You personally \nplayed a part in sabotaging efforts to get it merged into Core, and violating \nthe community's trust in it by instead merging your BIP9 ST without \nconsensus. Don't play dumb. You have nobody to blame but yourself.\n\nLuke",
"sig": "e5496e49efd841c2364a195b79c12a082501cc2e1a89932474607600c59b35e452549f6de9b0588190d3b189003f5153fe672cdfa9821c7eaed02da5a636fa5c"
}