related posts
373 sats \ 4 replies \ @nerd2ninja 5 Aug
Fucking finally!
reply
183 sats \ 3 replies \ @petertodd 6 Aug
It took me 11 years to get this merged into Core.
In fact, my second bitcointalk post, in Dec 10th 2010 (!!!), was to reply to Satoshi with a minor technical correction to a post Satoshi themselves made proposing the beginnings of the idea of replace-by-fee: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2181.msg28739#msg28739
As far as I know, it's my one and only interaction with Satoshi; I didn't get a reply. Satoshi's last post to bitcointalk was two days later on Dec 12th, obviously too embarassed by my technical correction to continue working on Bitcoin. :D
reply
31 sats \ 0 replies \ @theariard 6 Aug
Champagne Peter.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @quark 6 Aug
It was your fault that satoshi left!!! Just kidding LOL
Congratulations on the merge! :)
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 6 Aug
Satoshi went into hiding because of WikiLeaks
At least that's my theory
I clicked on your answer... Legendary!
reply
100 sats \ 2 replies \ @krawall 5 Aug
honestly it doesn't really matter.... there were always ways around even your node didn't have it on by default. plus for those people opposing it, that ship had already sailed. you could never trust a transaction in the mempool getting confirmed or not.
Keeping the feature out did not lead to any more security in having transactions guaranteed than otherwise. I have, on occasion, unpublished a transaction (still possible with bitcoin core I guess when you add config settings) and I have on a different occasion double spent because of my initial fee was way too low and no way to raise it.
we were thinking of accepting mempool only transactions if the fee were high enough and the amount was low enough but we never did. with the advent of L2 solutions (mostly lightning) this is even less of an issue now.
reply
421 sats \ 1 reply \ @petertodd 5 Aug
It actually does! Full-RBF prevents certain types of transaction pinning issues. So having more nodes run it is helpful even if ~100% of miners are already doing it.
Also, it'll help improve block propagation time a bit; right now compact blocks reconstruction frequently fails due to missing full-rbf replacements.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @krawall 6 Aug
Okay, I do some more reading... !
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @cointastical 5 Aug
Finally!
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ca 6 Aug
Let's a bold strategy, Cotton!
Let's see if it's going to work out for them.
reply