Mark Friedenbach [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2014-04-23 📝 Original message:On 04/22/2014 09:29 PM, ...
📅 Original date posted:2014-04-23
📝 Original message:On 04/22/2014 09:29 PM, Jan Møller wrote:
>>Of course, this is an especially difficult case, as you must send the
>>double-spend after the original transaction - normally just sending a
>>non-standard tx to Eligius first would suffice. Note how this defeats
>>Andresen's double-spend-relay patch(3) as proposed since the
>>double-spend is a non-standard transaction.
>
> Why can't you send a non-standard tx to Eligius first in this scenario?
> Is it because LuckyBit is connected directly to Eligius, and does
> Eligius relay (not only mine) non-standard transactions?
>
Because you only want to double-spend if you loss the bet. If you tried
to double-spend every bet, there'd be no point :)
📝 Original message:On 04/22/2014 09:29 PM, Jan Møller wrote:
>>Of course, this is an especially difficult case, as you must send the
>>double-spend after the original transaction - normally just sending a
>>non-standard tx to Eligius first would suffice. Note how this defeats
>>Andresen's double-spend-relay patch(3) as proposed since the
>>double-spend is a non-standard transaction.
>
> Why can't you send a non-standard tx to Eligius first in this scenario?
> Is it because LuckyBit is connected directly to Eligius, and does
> Eligius relay (not only mine) non-standard transactions?
>
Because you only want to double-spend if you loss the bet. If you tried
to double-spend every bet, there'd be no point :)