📅 Original date posted:2015-01-23 📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED ...

Peter Todd [ARCHIVE] /

npub1m23…2np2

2023-06-07 15:29:05

in reply to nevent1q…fn8c

📅 Original date posted:2015-01-23
📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 23 January 2015 08:35:23 GMT-08:00, slush <slush at centrum.cz> wrote:
>Oh, now I got the 'soft-fork' alternative. If that means that *senders*
>to
>Trezor need to be nice guys and use some special outputs, then it's,
>obviously, no-go solution.

That's what P2SH is for; the senders will just be sending to a P2SH address.

>I understand political aspect around hard-fork. Anyway, are there any
>other
>pending projects waiting for hard-fork?

Hard-forks aren't hard for directly political issues, they're politically hard because they're risky by requiring everyone yo upgrade at once. In the case of signature validation, that touches a *lot* of third party code that people rely on to avoid being defrauded.

FWIW I've actually got a half-finished writeup for how to use OP_CODESEPARATOR and a CHECKSIG2 soft-fork to have signatures sign fees and so forth.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: APG v1.1.1

iQFQBAEBCAA6BQJUwonGMxxQZXRlciBUb2RkIChsb3cgc2VjdXJpdHkga2V5KSA8
cGV0ZUBwZXRlcnRvZGQub3JnPgAKCRAZnIM7qOfwhbwkCADP7AcJ6a6V/y7MHt2x
ZiCXYsfHq5j03kbSWXGi1Q/9RqWGVha1fhWPp62yhDxbWOfh5QKauCbrt2g1AqT3
xbnh+2XE1rApBQIiJ6u0wZmpCi+4EhH2M9R8UYu9oIMzBe4K2jhzUbzcOR9Qplyq
9j6yevNrvtNHZb2OTiaKelxnuZUEiAsONHPOvR8Fkflwbd/w279OeilRjHYt3A/J
U22KOwjNrpa7/QE/HeC0QINqr3S132Yg4iYFwPviBwGq/WXQuLHIzGtgKOzrIC1T
h6kpWO9CjSxVbjMrf68IrSHRv92K8y1LiHFRZvzp3ulzcGBo2btazmrp/fUDLCr0
6uFg
=uDeM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Author Public Key

npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2

Show more details

Published at

2023-06-07 15:29:05

Kind type

1 Short Text Note

Event JSON

{ "id": "27b3482c7bffd795158768054fa8932364553276c48ab0583796919566c0f34f", "pubkey": "daa2fc676a25e3b5b45644540bcbd1e1168b111427cd0e3cf19c56194fb231aa", "created_at": 1686151745, "kind": 1, "tags": [ [ "e", "6dc832bdb706e2f61589ea679669c46a49f00ca991f53b93fef09a1a229115c6", "", "root" ], [ "e", "2e5b5722fd6410b0dd3174d29c992338aad6c72da38a891a52f0f4bab51d4f70", "", "reply" ], [ "p", "eb7ca795057ca7cabde6f541c741e661d013414934e5934c2e04c6677625c99a" ] ], "content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-01-23\n📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\nHash: SHA256\n\n\n\nOn 23 January 2015 08:35:23 GMT-08:00, slush \u003cslush at centrum.cz\u003e wrote:\n\u003eOh, now I got the 'soft-fork' alternative. If that means that *senders*\n\u003eto\n\u003eTrezor need to be nice guys and use some special outputs, then it's,\n\u003eobviously, no-go solution.\n\nThat's what P2SH is for; the senders will just be sending to a P2SH address.\n\n\u003eI understand political aspect around hard-fork. Anyway, are there any\n\u003eother\n\u003epending projects waiting for hard-fork?\n\nHard-forks aren't hard for directly political issues, they're politically hard because they're risky by requiring everyone yo upgrade at once. In the case of signature validation, that touches a *lot* of third party code that people rely on to avoid being defrauded.\n\nFWIW I've actually got a half-finished writeup for how to use OP_CODESEPARATOR and a CHECKSIG2 soft-fork to have signatures sign fees and so forth.\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\nVersion: APG v1.1.1\n\niQFQBAEBCAA6BQJUwonGMxxQZXRlciBUb2RkIChsb3cgc2VjdXJpdHkga2V5KSA8\ncGV0ZUBwZXRlcnRvZGQub3JnPgAKCRAZnIM7qOfwhbwkCADP7AcJ6a6V/y7MHt2x\nZiCXYsfHq5j03kbSWXGi1Q/9RqWGVha1fhWPp62yhDxbWOfh5QKauCbrt2g1AqT3\nxbnh+2XE1rApBQIiJ6u0wZmpCi+4EhH2M9R8UYu9oIMzBe4K2jhzUbzcOR9Qplyq\n9j6yevNrvtNHZb2OTiaKelxnuZUEiAsONHPOvR8Fkflwbd/w279OeilRjHYt3A/J\nU22KOwjNrpa7/QE/HeC0QINqr3S132Yg4iYFwPviBwGq/WXQuLHIzGtgKOzrIC1T\nh6kpWO9CjSxVbjMrf68IrSHRv92K8y1LiHFRZvzp3ulzcGBo2btazmrp/fUDLCr0\n6uFg\n=uDeM\n-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----", "sig": "06601cdc53513d6658a806c9f8c4136e7430991b811dbb8a45675170668c9bef05033da93102bad1b6141eece32217a9fb2884238e8dfb6f8e6b02d1f1ef332c" }