📅 Original date posted:2013-12-03
📝 Original message:On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> If users want to pay with a huge transaction then it seems to me the user
> should cover that cost. Allowing users to pay merchants with 100K
> transactions full of dust and expecting them to eat the cost seems like a
> great way to enable bleed-the-merchant-dry attacks.
>
A merchant can always refuse the payment and refund it if that's a
practical problem. I doubt it would be though. If a user is trying to buy
something from the merchant, they will want it to work, and it'll be up to
the developers of the wallet they're using to ensure it never does anything
obnoxious or unacceptable that would result in people hating to receive
money from that app.
> RE: hiding or showing fees: I pointed out to Peter that there doesn't
> have to be One True Answer. Let wallets experiment with either hiding or
> exposing fees, and may the best user experience win.
>
Sure. I think there will be experimentation in this regard.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131203/382b9201/attachment.html>;
Mike Hearn [ARCHIVE] /
npub17t…4qgyd
2023-06-07 15:10:09
in reply to nevent1q…elsz
Author Public Key
npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgydPublished at
2023-06-07 15:10:09Event JSON
{
"id": "113a1cad0be3b869875a90534ceb3174d1563e94db1f00314cd1b3ac4cc2f0de",
"pubkey": "f2c95df3766562e3b96b79a0254881c59e8639f23987846961cf55412a77f6f2",
"created_at": 1686150609,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"f082c8a0fa2ac5febf83583d19b2776fdb1875fb3ab2eae661676f17ee054405",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"c69e7db9b0c77fb65c56438b2aa4b69e9043626bbdef19c0c40cb164b3519e7f",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"857f2f78dc1639e711f5ea703a9fc978e22ebd279abdea1861b7daa833512ee4"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2013-12-03\n📝 Original message:On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Gavin Andresen \u003cgavinandresen at gmail.com\u003ewrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e If users want to pay with a huge transaction then it seems to me the user\n\u003e should cover that cost. Allowing users to pay merchants with 100K\n\u003e transactions full of dust and expecting them to eat the cost seems like a\n\u003e great way to enable bleed-the-merchant-dry attacks.\n\u003e\n\nA merchant can always refuse the payment and refund it if that's a\npractical problem. I doubt it would be though. If a user is trying to buy\nsomething from the merchant, they will want it to work, and it'll be up to\nthe developers of the wallet they're using to ensure it never does anything\nobnoxious or unacceptable that would result in people hating to receive\nmoney from that app.\n\n\n\u003e RE: hiding or showing fees: I pointed out to Peter that there doesn't\n\u003e have to be One True Answer. Let wallets experiment with either hiding or\n\u003e exposing fees, and may the best user experience win.\n\u003e\n\nSure. I think there will be experimentation in this regard.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131203/382b9201/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "49359ab1d1a857d9c5838f10c2c4590df5b39476df3724ec2c7444fe2549d812de3be1788fa859641d1b947f27baf7045af225d817815e4dbfc1558f41d2b234"
}