📅 Original date posted:2016-10-02
📝 Original message:It's good you bring that point, and it's very interesting to analyze what
happened then.
We shared our findings with some core developers much earlier than the BIP
proposal. Wether they kept it secret or they shared it with some ASIC
manufacturers is something I don't know. I even mentioned my wishes to try
to give the patent to public domain.
I remember the reason we proposed the BIP is because ASICBoost actually
does NOT require that BIP at all. And that BIP was not a consensus change,
but just a semantic re-interpretation.
ASICBoost can roll the nVersion field or the Merkle root hash. Doing the
former currently generates a strange warning message on nodes and can be
confusing, but doing the later makes ASICBoost completely stealthy. That
BIP could help the community to monitor its use in non-confusing way to the
users. What is worse? I think forcing it to be stealthy is worse.
I never opposed changing Bitcoin to be more decentralized, but hard-forking
a change to the PoW function may be contentious and that path of thought
must be walked very carefully.
Regards
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20161002/3104f53a/attachment.html>;
Sergio Demian Lerner [ARCHIVE] /
npub1fv…3vq7f
2023-06-07 17:53:47
in reply to nevent1q…ayuc
Author Public Key
npub1fvuxqdqg7klqqgy3yy8gdxjv4phu92sll5y8zqm2qe5qdrhxymhqf3vq7fPublished at
2023-06-07 17:53:47Event JSON
{
"id": "6cc75517c15e5cf9979b0d07631c5b9d82dc7662e1cbd0b73deddccb2c7afc4d",
"pubkey": "4b38603408f5be002091210e869a4ca86fc2aa1ffd0871036a0668068ee626ee",
"created_at": 1686160427,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"75d5de550c5669c9b08871122c22e1d76347c77ccbc4fa5f95f4a9f91a39ebfb",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"3e9ff8d89a713d0b5bb599341d678c82e1f8a370f2001dcc686fdbf49e6428f7",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"fdf31024ca0537ed828d895ddc8525f8af023f0dc935a8327a8a496d0d7a9f83"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2016-10-02\n📝 Original message:It's good you bring that point, and it's very interesting to analyze what\nhappened then.\n\nWe shared our findings with some core developers much earlier than the BIP\nproposal. Wether they kept it secret or they shared it with some ASIC\nmanufacturers is something I don't know. I even mentioned my wishes to try\nto give the patent to public domain.\n\nI remember the reason we proposed the BIP is because ASICBoost actually\ndoes NOT require that BIP at all. And that BIP was not a consensus change,\nbut just a semantic re-interpretation.\n\nASICBoost can roll the nVersion field or the Merkle root hash. Doing the\nformer currently generates a strange warning message on nodes and can be\nconfusing, but doing the later makes ASICBoost completely stealthy. That\nBIP could help the community to monitor its use in non-confusing way to the\nusers. What is worse? I think forcing it to be stealthy is worse.\n\nI never opposed changing Bitcoin to be more decentralized, but hard-forking\na change to the PoW function may be contentious and that path of thought\nmust be walked very carefully.\n\nRegards\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20161002/3104f53a/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "63f116bcb0a7d69491f4a96436d2777fdb90a32b40420f9f71ecc37685d97e0ecff2c462ba3b7ba2406929330f39099f3d9da8617d3614b4c121132567a9162e"
}