From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1WddE2-00084T-RG for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 10:19:22 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.219.46 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.219.46; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f46.google.com; Received: from mail-oa0-f46.google.com ([209.85.219.46]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WddDx-0007yu-Sq for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 10:19:22 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id m1so4010815oag.33 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 03:19:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.79.227 with SMTP id m3mr61104obx.74.1398421152587; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 03:19:12 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.96.180 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 03:19:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5359E9CB.9050703@gmail.com> References: <CAC1+kJM3pSq8YfwbX167rQ0=0Y_hozRQ3pggDN524=LUfOdTqg@mail.gmail.com> <CANEZrP1f9WV-Mp9SGm4q88h82xxBnwqg8M7JJhnqGOHCWf65xg@mail.gmail.com> <CAB+qUq7=o05GgCNdTtH=cuW56qbjg5v0ZpxvCYmCPj1AvFui+g@mail.gmail.com> <5359E9CB.9050703@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 12:19:12 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: vyCJHcIZtMswsjzGI5fYrUg6BIU Message-ID: <CANEZrP2FJ8m-kKeLiEZw-hb9teeVXay0FqzsJ0wJTtbNABetpA@mail.gmail.com> From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> To: Gareth Williams <gacrux@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01229d100be5c704f7db4c3f X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1WddDx-0007yu-Sq Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0 confirmation txs using replace-by-fee and game theory X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 10:19:23 -0000 --089e01229d100be5c704f7db4c3f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > You don't get any money back, but you do get an angry shopkeeper chasing > you down the street / calling the police / blacklisting you from the > store. > If they could do that they'd just take the stolen property back and you would have failed to spend your money twice. So this is by definition, not a successful double spend. We are worried about the cases when you could successfully double spend, and the only thing stopping you is Bitcoin. --089e01229d100be5c704f7db4c3f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo= ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c= cc solid;padding-left:1ex">You don't get any money back, but you do get= an angry shopkeeper chasing<br> you down the street / calling the police / blacklisting you from the<br> store. <br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>If they could do that they'= d just take the stolen property back and you would have failed to spend you= r money twice. So this is by definition, not a successful double spend. We = are worried about the cases when you could successfully double spend, and t= he only thing stopping you is Bitcoin.</div> </div></div></div> --089e01229d100be5c704f7db4c3f--