{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1k2eekmevs6gg60df75qpjw4a2atmy89vx28c8zqq5jxy64tuzrws39qd6m","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1k2eekmevs6gg60df75qpjw4a2atmy89vx28c8zqq5jxy64tuzrws39qd6m","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-11-01\n📝 Original message:On 10/30/2015 10:43 PM, Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e By that benchmark, we should aim for \"reasonable certainty\".  A\n\u003e transaction which would never have been generated by any known software\n\u003e is the minimum bar.  Adding \"...which would have to be deliberately\n\u003e stupid with many redundant OP_CHECKSIG etc\" surpasses it.  The only extra\n\u003e safeguard I can think of is clear, widespread notification of the\n\u003e change.\n\nIf the policy of Bitcoin Core development includes a willingness to\nmakes the utxos created by software other than Bitcoin Core unspendable,\nthen it certainly merits clear, widespread notification.\n\nEven if that is actually a good policy, the reasons why should be made\nabundantly clear.\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: 0xEAD9E623.asc\nType: application/pgp-keys\nSize: 23337 bytes\nDesc: not available\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151101/1034f016/attachment.bin\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 801 bytes\nDesc: OpenPGP digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151101/1034f016/attachment.sig\u003e"}