Prayank [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: š Original date posted:2022-01-18 š Original message:Hi Luke, This is the first ...
š
Original date posted:2022-01-18
š Original message:Hi Luke,
This is the first competent review for CTV based on my understanding. I would not mention controversial things in this email but nobody cares about scammers and we will review everything irrespective of personal or legal attacks on developers because some people are prepared for it and capable, competent and healthy.
> nit: Poorly phrased. Even simple scripts can do that already.
Agree
> I would ideally like to see fully implemented BIPs for at least one of these (preferably the claimed CoinJoin improvements) before we move toward activation.
Agree
> Hard NACK on this. BIP 9 at this point represents developers attempting to disregard and impose their will over community consensus, as well as an attempt to force a miner veto backdoor/vulnerability on deployment. It should never be used again.
Agree
Other technical comments on BIP are appreciated however they would be better answered by Jeremy at this point or other as I am still researching and not confident to comment.
--
Prayank
A3B1 E430 2298 178F
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220118/47a7823e/attachment.html>;
š Original message:Hi Luke,
This is the first competent review for CTV based on my understanding. I would not mention controversial things in this email but nobody cares about scammers and we will review everything irrespective of personal or legal attacks on developers because some people are prepared for it and capable, competent and healthy.
> nit: Poorly phrased. Even simple scripts can do that already.
Agree
> I would ideally like to see fully implemented BIPs for at least one of these (preferably the claimed CoinJoin improvements) before we move toward activation.
Agree
> Hard NACK on this. BIP 9 at this point represents developers attempting to disregard and impose their will over community consensus, as well as an attempt to force a miner veto backdoor/vulnerability on deployment. It should never be used again.
Agree
Other technical comments on BIP are appreciated however they would be better answered by Jeremy at this point or other as I am still researching and not confident to comment.
--
Prayank
A3B1 E430 2298 178F
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220118/47a7823e/attachment.html>;