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 3C2C18D7 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2017 01:32:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-vk0-f44.google.com (mail-vk0-f44.google.com [209.85.213.44]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF9CE154 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2017 01:32:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vk0-f44.google.com with SMTP id r69so25376785vke.2 for ; Wed, 05 Apr 2017 18:32:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=Wf1RecCtFU4rRNMFkAxFqfM9uYh4OxJJBw9rwA6ziTE=; b=Z6kHn8Vp6sr9jRUAgB5uhtTsp0tf972IFJ/2R9hhxwAs1k3RkIDXjAIaUzXs89h9G1 mYVu5cl+X7ZrGrAcO6yxKDYodZPMhXFc71QBXLcHex6bY5/+ORR5qoSSwWD6Dq31XAra MWrl6Y/imnbdpBO/HhDcQurZdps4rIZ3IslTjY+C791Jt9Se+wADABMs+J3t+64lCZ1+ numVmnPG+R2NBIEvpd7sM+mSLKzAMw1uKjYom9PqxF9V3Ia/16KS0wkgePzYddMnEae/ qjNsMmQu2tiHsA0yXKgyWz5cDud2m6FFm6VJhdQkI1EbilAzi0IiWHL8FbTCJzslepJL hlMg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Wf1RecCtFU4rRNMFkAxFqfM9uYh4OxJJBw9rwA6ziTE=; b=bla3t2kobddsAmgn2uwluwb1+LCMHsFvNGn9wBV9b5Grmeu5zkJBrxEd9IfCHwhS0q ghkWslAStDtFX3ukfXlQY9Y3s5iRI0apZPz19Su5dpyUOfM+ksVLUJlF7HhHM+UODquG HxC/2cN+ZS93NdFC6TF0R+JUiLASoCZh1SAdSGi4FzpESRN9H26QONaEgfMaogexIEFE BSILDSV6BWXbSvTMJSM2cWuUpAul3Paz13YwO1JxM5ATLQ1WsOPgokdVpvNsXDKoSYUT XbSHEpTdgtZ4CwOTWNnhL7lqe1c7kXCodxYv2514T1nupTDY5Hd2eGTSCzQ6vaoJkQ17 Kbew== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2D3HvhEPdWIFO2AVRaqdFOL9sj7FYtABIHWUTejJAoqEUP34BuqQPpI4hOcBaqnYi50zHPz9xQ2fdpCw== X-Received: by 10.176.65.196 with SMTP id 62mr17233585uap.82.1491442323747; Wed, 05 Apr 2017 18:32:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: gmaxwell@gmail.com Received: by 10.103.152.203 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 18:32:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170406003900.GB8379@lightning.network> References: <1491433518.2765667.935644008.2B153D86@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170406003900.GB8379@lightning.network> From: Gregory Maxwell Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 01:32:03 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: F0jnghED5i0nIK4i3d7xKdcrZaQ Message-ID: To: Joseph Poon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, 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 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Inhibiting a covert attack on the Bitcoin POW function 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: Thu, 06 Apr 2017 01:32:08 -0000 On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Joseph Poon wrote: > #bitcoin@freenode: > 00:04 gmaxwell| lol poon pretending that he isn't complicit in all this stuff. > > Are you *fucking* serious? Is this how you resolve all problems? I'm > taking you seriously and having second thoughts and want to make public > commitments to do the right thing without any evidence and you come out > and say *this*? I apologize for the glib talk on chat and I hope you understand that the tone in such venues is significantly informal; and that my remark was a causal one among friends which was not intended in a spirit as seriously as you've taken it. That said, two days ago you participated in a highly unusual announcement of a protocol change that-- rather than being sent for community review in any plausible venue for that purpose-- was announced as a done deal in embargoed media announcements. This proposed protocol change seemed custom tailored to preserve covert boosting, and incorporated direct support for lightning -- and the leading competing theory was that a large miner opposed segwit specifically because they wanted to block lightning. Moreover, I have heard reports I consider reliable that this work was funded by the miner in question. In the time since, when people asked for revisions to the proposal to not block segwit they received responses from the Bcoin account on twitter that "there would be no amendments", and I was sent leaked chatlogs of you making considerably hostile statements, claiming that if your extension block proposal is "a litmus test for corruption", and claimed (before AFAIK anyone had had a chance to comment on it) that the Bitcoin project contributors opposed it for "nonsense reasons". It is with this in mind that when you tried to pull me into an off the record conversation that I responded stating: "[...] I am disinclined to communicate with you except in email where I can get third party transferable proof of our communication. I'm concerned that you may now be involved in a conspiracy which I do not want to be implicated in myself. It is my estimation that, for that above reason, it would be in my best interest to not communicate with you at all. But in all your prior interactions you appeared to have integrity and sense, so out of respect for that history I'm willing to communicate with you, but only in public or in email where my end is on gmail." This was two days ago and you did not respond further. With that in mind I hope you do not find some casual crap-talking on chat to be especially surprising. I understand that you didn't intend for the initial message to be posted in public, so I'm sorry for continuing the thread here-- but I thought it was useful for people to understand the context behind that glib remark: Including the point that I do not know for a fact that you are complicit in anything, but I consider your recent actions to be highly concerning.