Author: Peter Todd 2022-04-28 12:15:02
Published on: 2022-04-28T12:15:02+00:00
In an email conversation, Jeremy Rubin questions the appeal to authority in Bitcoin-dev and states that the purpose of the group is to avoid wasting people's time with unnecessary information. He also expresses confusion about how OpenTimestamps (OTS) can support RBF for updating to larger commitments and not have an epoch-based re-committing scheme. He suggests that OTS may not be formally correct and has some holes in what it commits to or relies on clients re-requesting proofs if they fail to be committed. Rubin recommends having an actual spec for OTS to continue the conversation. When discussing sponsors and a hypothetical OTS-like service, Rubin believes that if something can make the service better in a way that would be compatible with old clients, then it should be changed rather than committing to a worse design goal. Peter Todd responds by questioning Rubin's understanding of cryptography and asks how linearization would help in an example use-case and what attack it would prevent.
Updated on: 2023-06-15T03:57:20.694120+00:00