Pieter Wuille [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2013-05-20 📝 Original message:On Tue, May 21, 2013 at ...
📅 Original date posted:2013-05-20
📝 Original message:On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 3:24 AM, Robert Backhaus <robbak at robbak.com> wrote:
> So the decision has been made to make 0-conf double spends trivial, so no
> one will ever trust 0-confs. If a later transaction appears with a larger
> fee, it will be considered to be the valid one, and the first one dropped,
> as long as the first one has not been confirmed. This makes undoing a
> mistaken transaction possible.
This has been suggested, but I know of no such decision having been made.
--
Pieter
📝 Original message:On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 3:24 AM, Robert Backhaus <robbak at robbak.com> wrote:
> So the decision has been made to make 0-conf double spends trivial, so no
> one will ever trust 0-confs. If a later transaction appears with a larger
> fee, it will be considered to be the valid one, and the first one dropped,
> as long as the first one has not been confirmed. This makes undoing a
> mistaken transaction possible.
This has been suggested, but I know of no such decision having been made.
--
Pieter