š
Original date posted:2015-06-06
š Original message:On Sat, Jun 06, 2015 at 05:23:48PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Luke Dashjr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
>
> > I also agree with Pieter, that this should *not* be so cleanly compatible
> > with Bitcoin transactions. If you wish to share code, perhaps using an
> > invalid opcode rather than OP_RETURN would be appropriate.
>
>
> Using an invalid opcode would merely send funds into the void. It wouldn't
> invalidate the transaction.
Just set nLockTime to 500000000-1 and nSequence appropriately to make
the transaction impossible to mine for the next 9500 years.
Though I agree that this whole idea seems a bit dubious to me.
--
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
00000000000000000000dd919214b66444dcebb4aa0214c1ab7c8b3b633be71f
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 650 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150606/3eae6c18/attachment.sig>;
Peter Todd [ARCHIVE] /
npub1m2ā¦a2np2
2023-06-07 15:36:51
in reply to nevent1qā¦qt7q
Author Public Key
npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2Published at
2023-06-07 15:36:51Event JSON
{
"id": "462cf283896e2c27134265ccb9e13e3b42bd7bb0ede94e7654f984616b718449",
"pubkey": "daa2fc676a25e3b5b45644540bcbd1e1168b111427cd0e3cf19c56194fb231aa",
"created_at": 1686152211,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"e1766602ba0f6768319a1583d11fb84dd1782fa79b735d969ef1342e648fd1da",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"b2188dc2e5825685a32b02188a97fafaf5f87db9093e79c33efe1d7dd70f1df4",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5cb21bf5d7f25a9d46879713cbd32433bbc10e40ef813a3c28fe7355f49854d6"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2015-06-06\nš Original message:On Sat, Jun 06, 2015 at 05:23:48PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote:\n\u003e On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Luke Dashjr \u003cluke at dashjr.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e \u003e I also agree with Pieter, that this should *not* be so cleanly compatible\n\u003e \u003e with Bitcoin transactions. If you wish to share code, perhaps using an\n\u003e \u003e invalid opcode rather than OP_RETURN would be appropriate.\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e Using an invalid opcode would merely send funds into the void. It wouldn't\n\u003e invalidate the transaction.\n\nJust set nLockTime to 500000000-1 and nSequence appropriately to make\nthe transaction impossible to mine for the next 9500 years.\n\nThough I agree that this whole idea seems a bit dubious to me.\n\n-- \n'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org\n00000000000000000000dd919214b66444dcebb4aa0214c1ab7c8b3b633be71f\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 650 bytes\nDesc: Digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150606/3eae6c18/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "0e3e1fdc08ee7e2cc73da977a1bb87cb641439fc06ee86ec1a42d17013b9f027264842808d101155608f08ca5dafb1e040322a989126461bd839adb449ce73df"
}