Re: [bitcoin-dev] Compatibility requirements for hard or soft forks

[Justus Ranvier <justus@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1034 bytes --]

On 11/01/2015 05:46 PM, Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> An OP_CAT script that requires TBs of RAM to validate crosses the
> threshold of reasonableness. 

Are there actually any OP_CAT scripts currently in the utxo set?

It's one thing to have a theoretical scripting ability that gets removed
before anyone actually uses it - that doesn't put anyone in the position
of retroactively making decisions about the validity of someone else's
money.

Presently the utxo set is about $5 billion worth of other people's money.

It's a lot easier to justify the position: "nobody has the right to
change the meaning of someone else's outputs", than it is to justify,
"some small group of people gets to decide what's standard and what
isn't, and if you choose to use the network in a valid but nonstandard
way, that group of people might choose to deny you access to your money
in the future"

In other words, how close to the shores of "administrators of a virtual
currency" do Bitcoin developers want to sail?



[-- Attachment #1.2: 0xEAD9E623.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 23699 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]