{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2013-10-29\n📝 Original message:Yes, exactly. That's the point. As you well know I think the whole\nsoft-fork mechanism is wrong and should not be used. If the rules change,\nyour node is *supposed* to end up on a chain fork and trigger an alert to\nyou, that's pretty much the whole purpose of Bitcoin's design. Undermining\nthat security model is problematic.\n\n\nOn Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Peter Todd \u003cpete at petertodd.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\n\u003e Hash: SHA256\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Peter Todd \u003cpete at petertodd.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003eOn Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:52:31AM +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:\n\u003e \u003e\u003e For block 0x11 again shall there be a separate code for \"block is\n\u003e \u003efrom the\n\u003e \u003e\u003e future\"? We don't want to lose the nVersion field to people just\n\u003e \u003eusing it\n\u003e \u003e\u003e for nonsense, so does it make sense to reject blocks that claim to be\n\u003e \u003ev2 or\n\u003e \u003e\u003e v3?\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003eThat would prevent us from using nVersion as a soft-forking mechanism.\n\u003e\n\u003e Actually, that statement didn't go far enough: rejecting blocks with\n\u003e nVersions that you don't expect is a hard fork.\n\u003e -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\n\u003e Version: APG v1.0.9\n\u003e\n\u003e iQFQBAEBCAA6BQJSb544MxxQZXRlciBUb2RkIChsb3cgc2VjdXJpdHkga2V5KSA8\n\u003e cGV0ZUBwZXRlcnRvZGQub3JnPgAKCRAZnIM7qOfwhfuGCADHB+5WZ3oSRCCYgId+\n\u003e 5c4rxZHjjmXXIVOlXySjoRQ20JUnGbkUqN057VlutYbWaGV7OqR0oQyzh0LGpMdL\n\u003e BU9hg8XoHbyIvA0WhCfEJvFzkwseN8Ac77UxtV3leBpBkSzjqlMS9QBGU6L5rw2U\n\u003e uo8Sd7bQaqkadOPode3MMWDtmmqAZaj2dN02w/8C1rRna3SrbYRVYbaVAuN9yREO\n\u003e 99DOGEM2V7ni+eo4sQoxP2jf8vmNzy1EuQH8v1OloPgcpxl/GkLVXzQh4ZfO1ApE\n\u003e UVKBo93oT34Tce9LwZy+k8XpeCvBRJ/+QwsbAAgdVYKr8KmRcAW4oR2KN7Y0jjq4\n\u003e 44xU\n\u003e =OaON\n\u003e -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\n\u003e\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131029/25e2fca3/attachment.html\u003e"}