馃搮 Original date posted:2015-09-16
馃摑 Original message:On Sep 16, 2015 4:49 PM, "Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Jorge Tim贸n <jtimon at jtimon.cc> wrote:
>>
>> No, 95% is safer and will produce less orphaned blocks.
>
> The point of the 75% is just as a test run. Enforcement wouldn't happen
until 95%.
>
> At 75%, if someone sets the bit, then they should be creating valid
blocks (under the rule).
You shouldn't rely on that, some may start applying the restrictions in
their own blocks at 0% and others only at 90%. Until it becomes a consensus
rule it is just part of the standard policy (and we shouldn't rely on nodes
following the standard policy).
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150916/0756bd20/attachment.html>;
Jorge Tim贸n [ARCHIVE] /
npub1fx鈥l2d8
2023-06-07 17:40:06
in reply to nevent1q鈥dux
Author Public Key
npub1fx98zxt3lzspjs5f4msr0fxysx5euucm29ghysryju7vpc9j0jzqtcl2d8Published at
2023-06-07 17:40:06Event JSON
{
"id": "99dadcacc34e8f0ffdcea19cf081015ee3d5e77eaa99bb28cec1c83b60e7704f",
"pubkey": "498a711971f8a0194289aee037a4c481a99e731b5151724064973cc0e0b27c84",
"created_at": 1686159606,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"97970fd647e1ad99b763fefc14ff6c3da92992c59a8d85f2e5fe9ba87f5c9fb9",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"90de3d3373177feacb0aa310d6b8c8e6e4bfca45a6c00071cf5b39ae5df0e702",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"46986f86b97cc97829a031b03209644d134b939d0163375467f0b1363e0d875e"
]
],
"content": "馃搮 Original date posted:2015-09-16\n馃摑 Original message:On Sep 16, 2015 4:49 PM, \"Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev\" \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Jorge Tim贸n \u003cjtimon at jtimon.cc\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e No, 95% is safer and will produce less orphaned blocks.\n\u003e\n\u003e The point of the 75% is just as a test run. Enforcement wouldn't happen\nuntil 95%.\n\u003e\n\u003e At 75%, if someone sets the bit, then they should be creating valid\nblocks (under the rule).\n\nYou shouldn't rely on that, some may start applying the restrictions in\ntheir own blocks at 0% and others only at 90%. Until it becomes a consensus\nrule it is just part of the standard policy (and we shouldn't rely on nodes\nfollowing the standard policy).\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150916/0756bd20/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "bcd2a5971aa6ad1840f14738f61fff4574469f3be2f91fffeb7011f23aa4b83548efcf219e29974a538998b814092ca67dda4c5ebd6e294733d9059512348e86"
}