pull down to refresh
1844 sats \ 3 replies \ @BitcoinErrorLog 27 Feb \ parent \ on: AJ Towns censoring on Delving Bitcoin to cover Bitcoin Core backdoors ? bitcoin
This is also how mempoolfullrbf got in. I had support from the author and some other core devs for a PR to remove it before release, but they said that because it was already scheduled for release in some weeks, it was me trying to change consensus. Since when his Core release schedule a method of consensus? The custom is that a clearly controversial change that disrupts the user space would at least be postponed, but no rational argument would be accepted.
You had no business defending your broken business model and fundamental misunderstanding of fullrbf in the first place, so lets not pretend that these issues are at all related.
There is an issue here, but it's not your misunderstanding of the security of 0 conf transactions or node relay policy or the inclusion of settings and configuration option enabling users to configure their relay policies as they please - and as they already could with more effort or alternative clients. Lets not conflate your misunderstanding with the politics of Bitcoin Core development.
reply
He had every right to object to a disruption of existing and appropriately risk-managed 0conf use cases.
Especially so when core contributors were also projecting an explicit desire to turn the default to ON in a future release on the back of its introduction.
I disagree that this isn’t related. Both situations are examples of pushing aside well articulated critique to achieve a false sense of consensus.
reply
As a PR author I still think
mempoolfullrbf is a worthy technical change, especially to avoid discrepancies among network mempool states.Retrospectively this is correct the deployment could have been more smoothed and coordinated to let some use-cases adapt their software.
Overall, I still think the conversation should be zoomed out, it’s missing the point on the role of transaction-relay and mempool policy is playing in the security and operations of modern bitcoin use-cases (e.g Lightning or ordinals), and the de facto technical leverage that Core as a project can exercise on them. It’s not anyone responsibility though kinda the situation we’re in today.
Highlighted community awareness on this subject as early as 2021:
https://bitcoinops.org/en/newsletters/2021/05/19/
reply