From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2718D78; Sat, 22 Sep 2018 05:00:09 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-vk1-f173.google.com (mail-vk1-f173.google.com [209.85.221.173]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67205A8; Sat, 22 Sep 2018 05:00:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vk1-f173.google.com with SMTP id 79-v6so3027645vkm.4; Fri, 21 Sep 2018 22:00:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=91UO5XaUkvDGLMxArkbXzgXDIn4t3kKwBRK+L+3j/q4=; b=rvfO2QeA+Pady2oUEBzazUURyNSTpMAvBGr8ZcJtlZLOs1y4GW+fz0olp121RIakGA A+sKa9Q1LgVq4OZoWMWKo2KTwMXtYrOmRqiqzbRLqKwSOKNegEpIju8pBtba4vUJGAcp XhA5U403iVqP/O/dNHsL6c27PLcHsxf9FW7fMMJHZmldBtp4+Vlw8c5wFSdJrPG6SSg6 IcQV+FbK3OPZ/DkeYh74lFZqzGPPk/0ZKN4jEIUJBvimPOC47TQVMeRWX5zJcZR1iuUI PCYnyonkZlXtDbh6urbRf64fTH0RHG4rIFAVC24sWmIWdyxDv5G6NGnJhNQfBcOp35+d Z8lw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfog+f/S3sQmef1RcwikS3oHyt1NU8NTTu2EbvAtpqodsws9LzQIU 2WI2zVf4p4wfHA8LcZf/fgFciB3IJOcv+ytxd3M= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV63az44JR8/dJ8CvoS+rw8IqY0M8nrEgvQ6JWYGZHLGgnv+9isFQtDFYo/CMQIJ14ihWXo4eMVnSWoyztB8qeEc= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:9594:: with SMTP id x142-v6mr180103vkd.63.1537592407466; Fri, 21 Sep 2018 22:00:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1537569586.4405.2.camel@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1537569586.4405.2.camel@yahoo.com> From: Gregory Maxwell Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2018 04:59:53 +0000 Message-ID: To: gb , Bitcoin Dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 22 Sep 2018 05:50:28 +0000 Cc: bitcoin-core-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [bitcoin-core-dev] Bitcoin Core update notice X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2018 05:00:09 -0000 On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 4:25 AM gb via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > If the bugfix can be backported to earlier versions why is the Have been backported, not merely can be. > hype/hysteria about "everybody" must immediately upgrade to 0.16.3 > currently being spread on the forums/reddit? For instructions to be effective they need to be concise. Presenting people with a complex decision tree is not a way to maximize wellfare. The few parties that would be better off on some other version already know that they have some reason to not run the latest stable, and can do more research to find out their other options. The announcement posted on the bitcoin core site, I think is adequately clear but if you see an opportunity to improve it, please make suggestions. > I don't see any effort to correct this misinformation either. It's decent advice, not misinformation. You can run the fixed earlier versions but they have other issues, I wouldn't recommend anyone run older versions generally. Reasoning about risk is complicated. For example, when people were talking about only the crash component of the issue there were some people stating "I don't care if I go down, an unlikely delay in processing payments would not be a problem." But, in fact, a network exploitable crash is pretty dangerous: an attacker can carve up the network into partitions that will produce long valid forks and reorg against each other, enabling double-spends. The best one sentence advice available is to upgrade to the latest version. You'd probably have to get up to two page explanations discussing trade-offs before it makes sense to talk about running a fixed 0.14 or what not. Theymos' language is stronger than I would have chosen, but I think it's language that errors on the side of protecting people from harm.