[Bitcoin-segwit2x] Addressing Segwit's anyone-can-spend "issue" with the hard fork?

Jameson Lopp jameson.lopp at gmail.com
Tue Jul 11 15:25:40 UTC 2017


Tom's correct that nodes and miners /could/ do those things, though the
same could be said for P2SH (except for witness relaying of course.) Miners
and users are always free to attempt to cheat and break the rules; we're
all watching each other and it's unlikely to end well for cheaters. ☺

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Marcel Jamin via Bitcoin-segwit2x <
bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> I don't understand this argument. SegWit requires miners to commit to it
> in order to even activate. Once activated, ignoring the newly established
> rules is no longer an option for miners as that would constitute a hard
> fork. This is purely technical.
>
> On 11 July 2017 at 13:17, Tom Zander via Bitcoin-segwit2x <
> bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> On Monday, 10 July 2017 20:35:25 CEST Jameson Lopp via Bitcoin-segwit2x
>> wrote:
>> > "anyone-can-spend" is not actually an issue. By the time SegWit2X's hard
>> > fork activates, there will be 3 months of proof of work accumulated on
>> top
>> > of SegWit activation; it would be economically infeasible for miners to
>> > reorganize the chain to deactivate SegWit at that point.
>>
>>
>> Your answer focuses only on the technical, and that is not enough in the
>> context of Bitcoin.
>>
>> Bitcoin is also economical and social. And those make an even bigger
>> difference in such questions.
>>
>> The scenario is not about rolling back blocks, the scenario is weather a
>> soft fork activation should be taken seriously by the network. They can
>> skip
>> mining of SW transactions. The network participants can skip relaying of
>> witness data. The network particiapnts can spend those everyone-can-spend
>> (or allow others to).
>>
>> In other words, the question is not who will roll-back 3 months, the
>> question is which network participants will actually hold the network to
>> the
>> promise of SegWit rules. Remember, clients that are not btc1 will not do
>> any
>> checking at all. To them these SW txs are in actual fact anyone-can-spend.
>>
>> Economically there is a large incentive for the network to cheat and
>> direct
>> segwit locked funds to charities or even themselves. But socially this may
>> be a bigger issue. And social rejection of a chain will have economic
>> implications.
>>
>> The basic fact that many overlook is that SegWIt is a highly contentious
>> soft fork. There is a huge group of people that would support a chain
>> without SegWit, and as such the economic downsides of the network not
>> honouring the social contract that is Segregated Witness will have a much
>> lower impact.
>>
>> As an end user I suggest waiting several months before sending a single
>> SegWit transaction, lest you lose the content.
>> --
>> Tom Zander
>> Blog: https://zander.github.io
>> Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list
>> Bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list
> Bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-segwit2x/attachments/20170711/8e08b723/attachment.html>


More information about the Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list