Reddit User Account Overview

/u/

/u/Htfr
Redditor Since December 19, 2015 (1,740 days old)
Karma Posts: 52 Comments: 2,984 Combined: 3,036
Active in


https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoincash/comments/hcrfd7/avalanche_and_sybil_resistance/

When using Avalanche to decide which transactions to include in a block, would there be a good reason to vote against a transaction for which no known double spend exists? I fail to see a reason. Considering that the vast majority of transactions will not be double spend, wouldn't it be reasonable to demand that a participant who votes against inclusion of a transaction is required to supply proof of an existing double spend? At first sight it seems that this might eliminate a multitude of possibilities to try to mess with the system. Like censoring of transactions by miners as mentioned [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=makSiyHebs8&t=22m). A simpler system could even take no decision at all in case of a detected double spend. There may be good reasons for a double spend (e.g., a fee that is too low on the original transaction), but in BCH reasonable use cases will probably be rare. So if a double spend is detected, an alternative resolution could be to just wait for a block. (This would reduce the orphan risk for miners that want to include recent "first seen" transactions in a block without waiting for Avalanche.) The only things that seem really important are to (1) disallow inclusion in block of double spends of transactions that have been approved by Avalanche, and (2) to have very fast Avalanche approval for a transaction for which no double spends are known. Thoughts?

posted by /u/Htfr in /r/Bitcoincash on June 20, 2020 14:41:41
Top
/r/btc/comments/iwnwdg/has_electrumx_electrum_server_fork_has_gone_full/g62l80y/

> We lost a lot of great people in the SV split This will happen with every split, some people will choose the other side of the split. Others will just give up.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 21, 2020 01:33:55
/r/btc/comments/iw4i2i/problems_with_crescent_cash_and_bip47_payment/g60371f/

Guess you are right, luckily the problem has been fixed

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 20, 2020 13:30:47
/r/btc/comments/iw4i2i/problems_with_crescent_cash_and_bip47_payment/g5y9o6u/

Good to hear

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 20, 2020 04:39:01
/r/btc/comments/iw4i2i/problems_with_crescent_cash_and_bip47_payment/g5xy89x/

There have been some [very nasty bugs](https://old.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/ha4f5a/warning_extremely_severe_issue_sending_money_with/) with crescent cash. Let's hope pokkst reacts to the ping

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 20, 2020 02:51:29
/r/btc/comments/iw7lvn/where_to_buy/g5xwkwd/

> Why is the bitcoin sub only about BTC At some point the bitcoin sub started to censor discussions. You can read about it [here](https://medium.com/@johnblocke/a-brief-and-incomplete-history-of-censorship-in-r-bitcoin-c85a290fe43). People started using this sub instead. This was before BCH existed, hence the name /r/btc. Ver is moderator of this sub and someone who has been promoting Bitcoin for a long time. BSV is a fork of BCH.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 20, 2020 02:36:50
/r/btc/comments/iw7lvn/where_to_buy/g5xrqgh/

> I didn’t want to ask the bitcoin subreddit, since that might be a mix of all the bitcoins That would make sense, but the bitcoin sub is only about BTC and this sub about all forks of bitcoin, including BCH. Might be confusing, but it is what it is for historic reasons. Note that BTC is hard to use for small transactions. But if you need to store a few million dollars somewhere, perhaps BTC is the tool for you. Good luck. You still might want to claim the BCH I sent you and learn how it works. BTC works similar, but is more expensive to use.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 20, 2020 01:55:56
/r/btc/comments/iw7lvn/where_to_buy/g5xobkk/

Try using the $200 one which is called Bitcoin Cash. Download a wallet and learn to use it /u/chaintip When you know how to use it, perhaps get more.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 20, 2020 01:34:11
/r/btc/comments/iw4i2i/problems_with_crescent_cash_and_bip47_payment/g5xlgny/

I'd recommend importing your seed into another wallet like [electron cash](https://electroncash.org) or maybe /u/_pokkst can help you

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 20, 2020 01:15:39
/r/btc/comments/ivrc06/best_bch_wallet_for_android/g5t1cuc/

Have a look at [bestbchwallets.com](https://www.bestbchwallets.com/)

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 19, 2020 08:12:28
/r/btc/comments/imb27k/private_tips_and_bchs_unsung_hero/g5st460/

It's just a lack of chaintips. Start using them, /u/chaintip

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 19, 2020 05:44:26
/r/btc/comments/imb27k/private_tips_and_bchs_unsung_hero/g5ssfd0/

Visit https://old.reddit.com/ with a browser to see what it looks like. It presents you the old looks of reddit. I guess I'm getting old.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 19, 2020 05:31:42
/r/btc/comments/imb27k/private_tips_and_bchs_unsung_hero/g5spnxf/

Nice! Just tested this. Note that private tips to comments using old.reddit links like [this one](https://old.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/imb27k/private_tips_and_bchs_unsung_hero/g44m5ob/) don't work. The tip will go to the poster instead.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 19, 2020 04:40:32
/r/btc/comments/ituhs7/sadly_i_wont_be_able_to_play_the_game_its_not/g5hz5nu/

Mid October it may have changed again. You can convert pesos to dollars up to $200 per month, but as the post notes, since this week card payments are taken into account. Spend $1000 with your card? Ok, the next five months no conversions to dollars for you. And your bank statement is shared with the tax authorities. Declaring income is easy, they already know about it.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 16, 2020 14:56:49
/r/btc/comments/itznt6/como_vender_tus_bitcoin_cash_en_localbitcoincom/g5htmiv/

Otra vez con la interfaz en inglés en vez de castellano.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 16, 2020 14:11:39
/r/Bitcoincash/comments/ithhud/how_to_pay_anonymously_and_easily_using_only/g5fvmkg/

> Bitcoin Cash, etc. with a Master Card Gift card There are places where you can buy small amounts with a Mastercard, although the fees are rather high.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/Bitcoincash on September 16, 2020 00:21:52
/r/btc/comments/itf54y/what_are_bchns_plans_for_preconsensusava/g5eh2hq/

There is only the ability to discard blocks that contain a double spend of a transaction that was approved by avalanche. This doesn't help to stop other transactions or arbitrary blocks.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 15, 2020 16:57:00
/r/btc/comments/itf54y/what_are_bchns_plans_for_preconsensusava/g5ecncu/

> And yet it could make that technically feasible. Please explain how.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 15, 2020 16:25:50
/r/Bitcoincash/comments/ita4s8/bitcoin_cash_community/g5e42ss/

You may want to clarify that. I guess lot of people became interested in 2017.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/Bitcoincash on September 15, 2020 15:30:09
/r/btc/comments/itf54y/what_are_bchns_plans_for_preconsensusava/g5e3iir/

> Which is proof of stake overruling proof of work. Semantics. I would say it is not. It is POW following consensus to pre-select one of multiple double spends. And double spends are exceptions. It is not about censoring arbitrary transactions as I have seen people claiming. > using avalanche to reject "turbo blocks" No need to use it for everything it can potentially be used for. Enthusiasm can lead to seeing many possibilities, nothing wrong with that. But having 0 confirmations is something that would be great to have.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 15, 2020 15:26:30
/r/btc/comments/itf54y/what_are_bchns_plans_for_preconsensusava/g5e0vat/

> it would create proof of stake layer that would be able to overrule proof of work. Some reference would be nice. If you read [this](https://github.com/tyler-smith/snowglobe/blob/master/spec/snowglobe.md#protocol-overview), it becomes clear that the only transaction that can be censored, is a double spend. There is no overruling of POW by POS. I heard this claim before, but it seems to be made up.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 15, 2020 15:09:20
/r/Bitcoincash/comments/ita4s8/bitcoin_cash_community/g5dy64d/

Before or after 2017? If I remember well the fork happened in 2017.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/Bitcoincash on September 15, 2020 14:51:14
/r/btc/comments/itcd9m/the_future_of_cashfusion/g5doke1/

Nice idea

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 15, 2020 13:44:16
/r/btc/comments/isuki7/more_than_500_bch_have_been_sent_through/g5bzm3m/

You'll need a wallet to scan a QR code. Get one /u/chaintip

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 15, 2020 02:33:11
/r/btc/comments/iqwxfz/psa_shills_have_failed_to_sway_the_people_in_this/g4wv5uz/

> completely ignoring them This sometimes works > the only appropriate response is a rude one This is what many trolls are trying to achieve. It will encourage them. You can just refute their points.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 12, 2020 04:19:09
/r/btc/comments/ir4edo/on_chain_video_idea_could_something_like_this/g4wme2z/

As jonald remarked you can do it yourself by calculating a hash and using a wallet, you can also drag a video file to this [website](https://notary.bitcoin.com/).

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 12, 2020 01:54:11
/r/btc/comments/ir0oj1/eli5_the_upcoming_fork_and_what_is_going_on_with/g4vhax5/

from [New release: Bitcoin ABC 0.22.0 is available to download](https://blog.bitcoinabc.org/2020/08/18/new-release-bitcoin-abc-0-22-0-is-available-to-download/) > A new coinbase rule will reinvest 8% of the coinbase reward into Bitcoin Cash infrastructure development. That means more technical talent can be hired to maintain and develop the network so it can better support your business moving forward.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 11, 2020 18:37:29
/r/btc/comments/iqwxfz/psa_shills_have_failed_to_sway_the_people_in_this/g4v4qrt/

It's not a debate if you are interacting with a troll. They do want you to believe so.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 11, 2020 16:58:54
/r/btc/comments/iqwxfz/psa_shills_have_failed_to_sway_the_people_in_this/g4v1jhe/

> New people who come here And see people bickering, abundant name calling, ... Attractive environment. Off course it is good to tell "the truth" as you perceive it.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 11, 2020 16:35:12
/r/btc/comments/iqwxfz/psa_shills_have_failed_to_sway_the_people_in_this/g4uxr7w/

> They always talk back. Of course

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 11, 2020 16:06:11
/r/btc/comments/iqwxfz/psa_shills_have_failed_to_sway_the_people_in_this/g4ux36k/

Just keep talking to trolls if you feel so inclined. They are stealing your time. It may be useful to refute their argument for the sake of other readers, engaging in a long discussion may be a waste of energy.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 11, 2020 16:01:26
/r/btc/comments/iqwxfz/psa_shills_have_failed_to_sway_the_people_in_this/g4uwbb4/

> So I cannot warn people about shills anymore Shit, and I didn't earn any shill label yet.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 11, 2020 15:56:05
/r/btc/comments/iqwxfz/psa_shills_have_failed_to_sway_the_people_in_this/g4uw04e/

I didn't say that. Should I say something nasty to you so you can report me? Some trolls get demotivated really quickly if you refute their "argument" once and then stop interacting with them. I know there are exceptions, but most want to suck you into a long discussion thread that often doesn't make much sense. Better not feed them. (And yes, I did use the word suck on purpose. Don't be offended please.)

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 11, 2020 15:53:54
/r/btc/comments/iqwxfz/psa_shills_have_failed_to_sway_the_people_in_this/g4uqnd0/

I'd recommend being somewhat polite and to stop feeding trolls. I imagine for some users that may be hard to do.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 11, 2020 15:13:44
/r/btc/comments/iqaf7q/is_bitpaycom_down_trying_to_check_my_bitpay_debit/g4qg9wc/

[Not down](https://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/bitpay.com)

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 10, 2020 15:39:32
/r/btc/comments/ipr510/cash_fusion_transactions_are_amazing_to_look_at/g4nvnsk/

Rather unlikely they will. So prepare for a bad user experience.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 10, 2020 08:03:18
/r/btc/comments/iq08ap/after_we_have_rejected_the_ifp_tax_bitcoin_cash/g4nhlow/

No need to wait, you can use it now.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 10, 2020 06:29:04
/r/btc/comments/ipzj0n/imo_the_tax_is_not_a_big_deal_just_add_it_and/g4nhbtx/

Both are a big deal. Seems there will be a split since few people prefer no split.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 10, 2020 06:27:07
/r/btc/comments/ipr510/cash_fusion_transactions_are_amazing_to_look_at/g4mrsuj/

> ABC chain will mine 2 blocks in 2 weeks Perhaps you are right. I'm not that good at predicting the future. > I hope he pays you and that you don't work for free! I have a paid job, don't worry. If I can sign up somewhere for paid shill bonuses, let me know. I'm just a tiny bit worried it will not be such a minor event like you are predicting.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 10, 2020 03:03:50
/r/btc/comments/ipr510/cash_fusion_transactions_are_amazing_to_look_at/g4mpqaf/

If both parties don't care that end users have a problem, I would argue that both are not acting in the most professional way possible. With the BSV split there were at least some different operators. This split has the potential to become a total mess. No need to feel attacked by me, you just could do better.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 10, 2020 02:30:53
/r/btc/comments/ipr510/cash_fusion_transactions_are_amazing_to_look_at/g4mp3l1/

More or less the reaction I expected. Seems you don't care too much about actual users and even less about privacy. Sad.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 10, 2020 02:21:14
/r/btc/comments/ipr510/cash_fusion_transactions_are_amazing_to_look_at/g4mnson/

Seems there is a fork coming soon. People will carelessly sell coins on the side of the fork they don't like which will unfortunately unshuffle/unfusion things to some degree. It would be good to add replay protection to BCHN now. ABC will not do it and if every existing coin needs to be tainted with newly minted coins it will be even worse for privacy. Tagging some people that may disagree. /u/jonald_fyookball /u/NilacTheGrim /u/markblundeberg

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 10, 2020 02:01:43
/r/btc/comments/iorxx0/102878_bitcoincash_bch_23044672_usd_transferred/g4ggydt/

Assuming output 1 is change you mean. Doesn't have to be.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 8, 2020 13:00:07
/r/btc/comments/io6aed/ill_tip_100_in_bch_to_whoever_rescues_this/g4bp4ep/

/u/toomuch72

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 7, 2020 08:32:13
/r/btc/comments/inecoy/flipstarter_spam/g4azgyc/

I agree. Just waiting for a flipstarter for someone who wants to get their hair done.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 7, 2020 01:23:32
/r/btc/comments/inecoy/flipstarter_spam/g47nq3q/

rule 2

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 6, 2020 03:36:05
/r/btc/comments/infpxc/debt_violence_end_debt_end_war/g47mxbs/

You mean when there is sufficient funding to remove any remaining technical debt you will stop the meme war?

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 6, 2020 03:22:28
/r/btc/comments/impvcv/new_numpties_episode_why_bsv_is_a_better_wife/g43c1tl/

It actually has a lot to do with Bit Coin if you spell it that way.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 5, 2020 02:54:06
/r/btc/comments/ims0qy/bch_city_conference_the_greatest_concentration_of/g43bu1z/

> The second attempt at 360 BCH is $83,000. More like 114000 dollar

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 5, 2020 02:51:24
/r/btc/comments/imrmvc/rbtc_has_put_on_16500_new_members_in_2_months_55/g43ay61/

Is /u/silver4260 masquerading as digital gold?

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 5, 2020 02:40:38
/r/btc/comments/imrmvc/rbtc_has_put_on_16500_new_members_in_2_months_55/g43atsp/

Humans probably less than 8.000.000.000. But I suspect some of these new users are dogs.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 5, 2020 02:39:12
/r/btc/comments/imt4c2/a_feature_request_for_readcash/g439cra/

Instead of a minimum get attention tax (can we get a bot warning when someone refers to something as a tax? The vkash automoderator bot is great. /s) an alternative would be the ability to sort by donation amount. Still everyone can comment. People with too much time can read it. Add upvoting with money for extra fun.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 5, 2020 02:21:41
/r/btc/comments/im9o7y/why_is_there_a_bot_for_the_term_bcash_but_not_the/g3ymr5p/

What is preventing you from creating the bot you want?

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on September 4, 2020 04:46:53
/r/btc/comments/iizu7t/the_split_is_inevitable_so_are_we_going_to_war/g3byppu/

> amicably That would mean two new tickers and two new coin names. Don't see that happening, although I think it would be an amicable way to split.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 30, 2020 03:35:05
/r/btc/comments/ifoxst/the_future_deliverables_of_the_bitcoin_cash_node/g2oye8e/

> Presentation, state, persistence, network and crypto are completely entangled. I once looked at the electron cash source when I encountered a bug. I like electron cash, but I'm afraid there is a lot to improve here.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 24, 2020 10:13:35
/r/Bitcoincash/comments/idm009/bch_latam_jul_2020_activity_report/g2b65ct/

No flipstarter, but I think you can still support BCH Latam by buying some tokens [here](https://memo.cash/token/30715aed785f35c4645632c37789a157996b1785023ef987ddca19a8b31736f1?for-sale)

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/Bitcoincash on August 21, 2020 05:32:22
/r/Bitcoincash/comments/idi3ws/bitcoincash_fork_november_2020/g2b5rhq/

> At the worst extreme, BCH would become more or less the same values as before Or lots people will get fed up with BCH and sell both coins, either before or after the split, and BCH will be worth $40.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/Bitcoincash on August 21, 2020 05:25:25
/r/btc/comments/idbou8/avalanche_overkill_use_tzs_double_spend_proofs/g29pvyw/

> I believe it opens the door to censorship, if implemented in a specific way. Nice to belief something I guess. How would you be able to censor a transaction for which no double spend is known while conforming to [this](https://github.com/tyler-smith/snowglobe/blob/master/spec/snowglobe.md#protocol-overview)? If you have a concrete scenario in mind, please explain it so that the protocol can be improved to counter your scenario.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 20, 2020 19:21:54
/r/btc/comments/idbou8/avalanche_overkill_use_tzs_double_spend_proofs/g29pthu/

> Anyone can always construct a double spend proof of their own transaction. Sure, but not relevant. The idea with avalanche is that if a transaction is accepted and thereafter a double spend get broadcasted it will no longer be considered since a conflicting transaction has already been accepted. > but I'm primarily interested in the safety guarantees for a honest miner not to be maliciously framed as a double spender accomplice This indeed. Once the state of a transaction is finalised, it should be nearly impossible to reverse it, so it should be safe to include it in a block.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 20, 2020 19:21:16
/r/btc/comments/id9g2v/why_is_bitcoin_cashs_coinmarketcap_6_times_higher/g28crz4/

[video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBxbiH_Mg44)

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 20, 2020 13:11:18
/r/btc/comments/idbou8/avalanche_overkill_use_tzs_double_spend_proofs/g28c9pf/

Yes, the devil is in the details. I see people claiming avalanche enables censorship. If you read what is written about it (the many ifs) then it appears these people didn't bother to look at avalanche but where making assumptions that are not explicit (ignoring the ifs).

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 20, 2020 13:07:34
/r/btc/comments/idbou8/avalanche_overkill_use_tzs_double_spend_proofs/g28bhtj/

It will always be pow overruling pow. If every publicly broadcasted transaction is voted on by Avalanche, a miner can (should?) choose to include only transactions approved by Avalanche. If Avalanche only allows rejection of transactions that have a known double spend, then avalanche approval of the vast majority of the transactions can be fast. Double spends may have slower consensus, but I don't see how this would be a problem. I actually think it would be fine to have no pre-consensus for double spends at all, but avalanche will make a choice.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 20, 2020 13:01:21
/r/btc/comments/idbou8/avalanche_overkill_use_tzs_double_spend_proofs/g28689a/

> Avalanche could effectively permit a small group of holders to overrule proof of work threatening the very core incentives of Bitcoin Cash. Miners can currently orphan a block for "reasons" and have done so in the past. If the consensus rules only allow orphaning a block that contains a transaction for which there exists a known double spend, and that other transaction (not included in the block) was "approved" by avalanche, I don't see opportunities to censor transactions other than currently already available. It depends on the details of avalanche, but this was included in the high level spec that was written. Double spend proofs are nice, but there will be few places that currently require n confirmations that will drop this requirement because of double spend proofs. With avalanche they might and this may make fast accepted transactions possible which in turn may enable new use cases for high value trading and remittances.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 20, 2020 12:20:02
/r/btc/comments/ibzjts/there_is_already_a_peer_to_peer_electronic_cash/g237n45/

(Could Dash Be a Scam?)[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBxbiH_Mg44]

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 19, 2020 06:57:41
/r/btc/comments/i8mf0b/after_the_november_upgrade_we_need_only_one/g19e9n1/

If you can find a buyer that wants to pay that much you mean, in the end, you may need to sell it for little.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 12, 2020 17:43:48
/r/btc/comments/i8mf0b/after_the_november_upgrade_we_need_only_one/g19c1x6/

Someone will mine it, and when it gets sufficiently cheap, someone will buy it.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 12, 2020 17:26:01
/r/btc/comments/i7ovut/uncertainty_regarding_november_is_bchs_biggest/g136cev/

Signalling will not help much. Only an (extremely unlikely) compromise to have no split might. Seems nobody wants that (when it comes to making compromises), although everybody wants it (when it is about the result to have no split).

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 11, 2020 06:08:52
/r/btc/comments/i4rlkk/the_version_of_bch_where_the_creator_of_the_block/g0m3rjh/

> that starts a new coin owned by the creator of the block. **This adds an incentive for nodes to support the network**, Note that this incentive has greatly diminished. Sending part of the block subsidy to a third party might actually disincentivise miners that do not support BCH to mine it. You can argue wether that is good for BCH or not.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 6, 2020 18:23:56
/r/btc/comments/i2wefe/i_really_think_that_this_grasberg_developer_guy/g09ojtj/

No, just not public.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on August 3, 2020 19:10:16
/r/btc/comments/i12ovc/does_bch_network_not_accept_transactions_with_tx/fzu9h25/

Fee improvements are on the [roadmap](https://bitcoincash.org/roadmap.html). Perhaps relevant: [reintroducing free transactions](https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/T706)

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 31, 2020 03:20:46
/r/btc/comments/i02ek5/can_you_use_electron_cash_for_bitcoin_sv/fzmt5nz/

I think Electron Cash version 3.3.2 still works with SV. But it has some security issuers, so be careful. Better first move your BCH out of the wallet.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 29, 2020 12:16:17
/r/btc/comments/hzuifn/buip_reject_pastdrift_correcting_daas/fzmsobd/

I don't expect issues. It is unsure what is going to happen. If the drift correction will be implemented, then /u/JonathanSilverblood is right that this will have consequences on some smart contracts that use block hight as approximate time. It will be further off than now in some cases. For longer running contracts things might in theory improve a bit, but there are probably not too many of these contracts. It also has consequences on long running lock time transactions, both positive and negative effects can be expected, depending on when they were created.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 29, 2020 12:12:05
/r/btc/comments/i02c1q/bch_in_2020_trouts_perspective/fzmrtxw/

Yeah, it could even be more miners running ABC. I doubt that one of the large miners that was signaling for BCHN a few months ago, and has now completely disappeared again, was really running BCHN. But perhaps they actually did.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 29, 2020 12:04:42
/r/btc/comments/hzzgz4/bitcoin_core_fees_have_gone_crazy_again/fzm8msr/

> ver & amaury are synonomous with bch You didn't call it bcash!

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 29, 2020 09:05:57
/r/btc/comments/hzy3f4/i_have_been_permanently_banned_from_rbtc_for/fzm3hrt/

> the extreme tolerance of its mods. So explain this particular poster was banned.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 29, 2020 08:06:15
/r/btc/comments/hzuifn/buip_reject_pastdrift_correcting_daas/fzm253w/

I don't think this is on the table, unless you want to put it there.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 29, 2020 07:48:23
/r/btc/comments/hzy3f4/i_have_been_permanently_banned_from_rbtc_for/fzm1bsw/

Where is John Block?

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 29, 2020 07:37:17
/r/btc/comments/hzy3f4/i_have_been_permanently_banned_from_rbtc_for/fzm18me/

Do you consider OP and the twitter user to be the same person? I don't. OP also [implies](https://old.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/hzy3f4/i_have_been_permanently_banned_from_rbtc_for/fzlvx5s/) this.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 29, 2020 07:36:03
/r/btc/comments/hzy3f4/i_have_been_permanently_banned_from_rbtc_for/fzm11zw/

So all posters about Mow and gym friend should have been banned as well? Perhaps /u/BitcoinXiO should do that retroactively. I have the impression this was a one time post (not sure about this) so banning the user instead of just removing the post seems rather hypocrite at first sight.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 29, 2020 07:33:31
/r/btc/comments/hzuifn/buip_reject_pastdrift_correcting_daas/fzljtcc/

> Correcting for past drift, by necessity, causes future blocks to be produced at a slower rate Depends what one would want to correct. If it is block height, this would be correct. If it is about issuing block subsidy, the subsidy per block could be lowered instead as [mentioned](https://old.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/hyxe0m/to_outcompete_btc_we_dont_need_to_correct_the/fzfltsw/) by /u/NilacTheGrim Deadalnix has a point that problem statements are nice. I don't know about one for the drift correction.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 29, 2020 02:52:37
/r/btc/comments/hznfn3/hi_i_want_to_give_my_opinion_on_a_few_things/fzkadai/

> and with how we look unprofessional and childish. Seems some people really enjoy this. And if, for a brief moment, there is no "conflict" to be childish about, there is the childish name calling. Unless someone writes bcash, that's not done and Fookball's essay is immediately linked.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 28, 2020 18:56:29
/r/Bitcoincash/comments/hzc691/best_wallet_for_bitcoin_cash_review/fzi0ypl/

Electrum on #1? Perhaps replace with [Electron Cash](https://electroncash.org) and have a look at [bestbchwallets.com](https://www.bestbchwallets.com/) for the rest.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/Bitcoincash on July 28, 2020 06:46:11
/r/btc/comments/hz55hw/why_is_tobias_ruck_able_to_work_constructively/fzhnwl8/

What a relief. I had this little fear it would be Klingon instead.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 28, 2020 03:05:31
/r/Bitcoincash/comments/hz1so8/sacred_currency_jesus_becomes_a_token_on_the/fzhlyns/

An interesting part is that you can burn these tokens. How cool is that?

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/Bitcoincash on July 28, 2020 02:35:31
/r/btc/comments/hz55hw/why_is_tobias_ruck_able_to_work_constructively/fzhkxsx/

I was told that off camera they converse in Latin

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 28, 2020 02:20:08
/r/btc/comments/hz3aot/after_receiving_feedback_from_the_community_in/fzhjidq/

> LOL Go find some bugs then. It may not be optimized for the BCH use case, because that is not what they try to build. But it is well reviewed.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 28, 2020 01:59:44
/r/btc/comments/hz3upr/new_anonymous_40_bch_donation_to_bitcoin_abc_for/fzhi9gr/

> I.e. avalanche would say "we don't know which transaction came first" Avalanche will just pick an arbitrary one on which everyone agrees. There is no objective "first seen" over multiple nodes.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 28, 2020 01:42:15
/r/btc/comments/hyxe0m/to_outcompete_btc_we_dont_need_to_correct_the/fzfpcu6/

> What about correcting for this by decreasing mining reward instead? Decreasing the block subsidy would be an interesting alternative. It may have some of the theoretical (has anyone made these explicit?) benefits without slower confirmation times. It also would be better for some smart contracts, but wouldn't help to "correct time" for some lock time transactions made a long time ago.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 27, 2020 15:31:42
/r/btc/comments/hyxe0m/to_outcompete_btc_we_dont_need_to_correct_the/fzfjlhf/

Hmm, lost keys? Anyway, op better say what they meant, I'm just guessing.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 27, 2020 14:46:07
/r/btc/comments/hyxe0m/to_outcompete_btc_we_dont_need_to_correct_the/fzfiumk/

I guess they are alluding to "lost" coins

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 27, 2020 14:40:04
/r/btc/comments/hyxe0m/to_outcompete_btc_we_dont_need_to_correct_the/fzfhonw/

> But even if we don't the next halving will be BTC *before* BCH Of course this is assuming the price/hash rate of BTC does not go down. In theory the drift on BTC could reverse, though maybe not likely in the next 4 years.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 27, 2020 14:30:57
/r/btc/comments/hyr32t/the_double_spend_flowchart/fzfgc1z/

> Avalanche is only run for double-spent tx You would need to check every transaction. A double spend may not have reached certain nodes, e.g., because of relay policy for a low fee, so not every one may know about them. Nobody knows of a double spend? Great: transaction finalized. Conflicting transaction found: pick any. > If Avalanche would have to "approve" every tx (even if no double spend known yet) then Avalanche could censor every tx it wants even easier No. It should only be possible to reject a transaction if a double spend exists.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 27, 2020 14:20:45
/r/btc/comments/hyr32t/the_double_spend_flowchart/fzf6lek/

You state: > if a competing miner finds a block, broadcast a second tx double spending the tx included in the competing miners block My understanding of how it should work is: Avalanche has already "approved" the transaction in the block. After pre-consensus has been reached on that transaction, discovering a "new" double spend can no longer result in invalidating the transaction that is included in the block, since it already went through Avalanche. You're scenario should of course be avoided, see also [here](https://github.com/tyler-smith/snowglobe/blob/master/spec/snowglobe.md#protocol-overview): > Each client maintains a Snowball-based vote accumulator for every unfinalized item it has seen. As soon as an item is seen an accumulator is created and the finalization process begins. For as long as there are unresolved conflict sets a client will pick a random peer, ask them to vote for the items of each set, and feed those votes into the items' vote accumulators. **Once the acceptance confidence of an item reaches a threshold its conflict set is resolved; this item is accepted an all conflicting items are rejected**.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 27, 2020 13:04:28
/r/btc/comments/hyr32t/the_double_spend_flowchart/fzextto/

> There isn't even a specification yet Of course a detailed specification would be nice. I linked to [this document](https://github.com/tyler-smith/snowglobe/blob/master/spec/snowglobe.md#protocol-overview) which states: > We consider every block and transaction to be a member in conflict set of 1 or more items, based on points of mutual exclusion, e.g. spending the same UTXO. The author of this document [stated](https://old.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/huo835/thanks_to_the_anonymous_person_who_recently/fypefti/): > "No" votes only count if they are voting "yes" for a different item in the same conflict set. If it is done this way, there is no possibility to censor transactions that are not double spends.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 27, 2020 11:54:21
/r/btc/comments/hyr32t/the_double_spend_flowchart/fzewdq4/

So what if I could deposit a lot of coins to an exchange with 0-conf, trade and withdraw immediately and have a miner double spend the deposit trx with the miner getting half of it? 0-conf for an exchange would be great, since someone may want to trade and withdraw immediately. But it would require secure 0-conf for large amounts. I think 0-conf for large amounts would enable new use cases, not every trade is possible when you need to wait for confirmations.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 27, 2020 11:42:45
/r/btc/comments/hyr32t/the_double_spend_flowchart/fzeu5wi/

It is theoretical because for larger amounts multiple confirmations are required. Allowing 0-conf for larger amounts would enable new use cases.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 27, 2020 11:24:55
/r/btc/comments/hyr32t/the_double_spend_flowchart/fzetqqq/

Currently, requiring multiple confirmations for large transactions mitigates the malicious miner problem. Having 0-conf for large transaction amounts would enable new use cases.

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 27, 2020 11:21:36
/r/btc/comments/hyr32t/the_double_spend_flowchart/fzetb5j/

See comment [here](https://old.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/hyr32t/the_double_spend_flowchart/fzet7pf/)

Commented by /u/Htfr in /r/btc on July 27, 2020 11:18:04
Top