📅 Original date posted:2013-10-25
📝 Original message:> There's no reason the signing can't be done all at once. The wallet
> app would create and sign three transactions, paying avg-std.D, avg,
> and avg+std.D fee. It just waits to broadcast the latter two until it
> has to.
i see several reasons why this is problematic.
So how would that work in a setting where the user signs a transaction
created offline, transmitted via Bluetooth via a one-way broadcast?
does it transmit all 3 tx to the receiver and just hopes they he will do
the "right thing"?
>
> On 10/25/13 5:02 AM, Andreas Petersson wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Worth thinking about the whole ecosystem of wallets involved;
>>> they all have to handle double-spends gracefully to make tx
>>> replacement of any kind user friendly. We should try to give
>>> people a heads up that this is coming soon if that's your
>>> thinking.
>>
>> If there is a situation where wallets are supposed to constantly
>> monitor the tx propagation and recreate their transactions with
>> different fees, this would make a lot of usecases inconvenient.
>> half-offline bluetooth transactions, users with unstable
>> connections, battery power lost, etc, etc. - and last but not least
>> power concerns on hardware wallets on the bitcoincard (tx signing
>> drains a significant amount of power and should therefore only be
>> done once)
>>
>>
Andreas Petersson [ARCHIVE] /
npub10z…qsg9a
2023-06-07 15:07:55
in reply to nevent1q…mpuw
Author Public Key
npub10zyxjrelgpp85qc93pnt8e4yx0jsxm27sn9lsypkhlrttjpmjktqkqsg9aSeen on
wss://relay.nostr.bandPublished at
2023-06-07 15:07:55Event JSON
{
"id": "33dd39372268ce52c0f83f992add4e4e489e73d347ebad7c0a5c3b4954ef84c7",
"pubkey": "7888690f3f40427a03058866b3e6a433e5036d5e84cbf81036bfc6b5c83b9596",
"created_at": 1686150475,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"82aca9d85d9f8088587f8710d511958183b300f7daa0a8fd33090fc324b509ac",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"d7748905c02d7dcf169055a4b07e0d6b9f607f66f6143e3835ecba5e1394d3c1",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"1c61d995949cbfaf14f767784e166bde865c7b8783d7aa3bf0a1d014b70c0069"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2013-10-25\n📝 Original message:\u003e There's no reason the signing can't be done all at once. The wallet\n\u003e app would create and sign three transactions, paying avg-std.D, avg,\n\u003e and avg+std.D fee. It just waits to broadcast the latter two until it\n\u003e has to.\n\ni see several reasons why this is problematic. \nSo how would that work in a setting where the user signs a transaction\ncreated offline, transmitted via Bluetooth via a one-way broadcast?\ndoes it transmit all 3 tx to the receiver and just hopes they he will do\nthe \"right thing\"?\n\n\n\u003e \n\u003e On 10/25/13 5:02 AM, Andreas Petersson wrote:\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e\u003e Worth thinking about the whole ecosystem of wallets involved;\n\u003e\u003e\u003e they all have to handle double-spends gracefully to make tx\n\u003e\u003e\u003e replacement of any kind user friendly. We should try to give\n\u003e\u003e\u003e people a heads up that this is coming soon if that's your\n\u003e\u003e\u003e thinking.\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e If there is a situation where wallets are supposed to constantly\n\u003e\u003e monitor the tx propagation and recreate their transactions with\n\u003e\u003e different fees, this would make a lot of usecases inconvenient. \n\u003e\u003e half-offline bluetooth transactions, users with unstable\n\u003e\u003e connections, battery power lost, etc, etc. - and last but not least\n\u003e\u003e power concerns on hardware wallets on the bitcoincard (tx signing\n\u003e\u003e drains a significant amount of power and should therefore only be\n\u003e\u003e done once)\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e",
"sig": "2ff94288c3ad98a2242c69476b1173f15c928c4cddd04e92a004ca0da5413a37dfee70764b2ecea463f213683d65c39bbe7d109de4fddb3785638325e6213152"
}