Hi AJ,

> Under *any* other circumstance, when they're used to activate a bad soft
fork, speedy trial and bip8 are the same. If a resistance method works
against bip8, it works against speedy trial; if it fails against speedy
trial, it fails against bip8.

IIRC one essential difference between ST (which is a variant of BIP9) and BIP8 is that since there is no mandatory signaling during the lockin period, you can't do a counter soft fork as easily. This is one of the points that Luke mentioned to me that made clear the benefits of the mandatory signaling. A variant of ST that does require mandatory signaling may actually be something that can improve the process and give users a more effective means of forking away from SF changes that they reject.

Keagan

On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 12:58 PM Jorge Timón via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:


On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 2:14 PM Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 12:13:08PM +0100, Jorge Timón wrote:
> You're not even considering user resistance in your cases.

Of course I am. Again:

No, you're relying on miners to stop bad proposals.
 
> > My claim is that for *any* bad (evil, flawed, whatever) softfork, then
> > attempting activation via bip8 is *never* superior to speedy trial,
> > and in some cases is worse.
> >
> > If I'm missing something, you only need to work through a single example
> > to demonstrate I'm wrong, which seems like it ought to be easy... But
> > just saying "I disagree" and "I don't want to talk about that" isn't
> > going to convince anyone.

The "some cases" where bip8 with lot=true is *worse* than speedy trial
is when miners correctly see that a bad fork is bad.

Under *any* other circumstance, when they're used to activate a bad soft
fork, speedy trial and bip8 are the same. If a resistance method works
against bip8, it works against speedy trial; if it fails against speedy
trial, it fails against bip8.

You're wrong.
 
> Sorry for the aggressive tone, but I when people ignore some of my points
> repeteadly, I start to wonder if they do it on purpose.

Perhaps examine the beam in your own eye.

Yeah, whether you do that yourself or not: sorry, it's over.
 
Cheers,
aj
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev