Author: Nick ODell 2015-12-30 23:13:56
Published on: 2015-12-30T23:13:56+00:00
In a conversation between Emin Gün Sirer and Peter Todd, two technical criticisms and one economic criticism of Emin's proposal were discussed. The first technical criticism was that unified miners would mine transactions on Dum first and then on Dee, but it contradicts the later section that says users can use Dee natively without paying fees necessary to get a transaction into Dum. The second technical criticism was about the vulnerability of Dum if some other group made a false-flag attack against Dee. The economic criticism was about the inability to reach a compromise if there was a difference in market cap value of the chains. Peter Todd also mentioned that most multisig transactions are hidden behind p2sh, and there is no way to know what keys are involved. However, he agreed that Bitcoin-United relies on a notion of transaction equivalence that doesn't involve the transaction hash and should be immune to malleability issues and compatible with segwit. He suggested simpler and more predictable solutions to achieve convincing consensus, such as proof of stake voting or Adam Bank's extension blocks suggestions. Overall, Peter Todd concluded that the proposal was not a good idea, and any Bitcoin United scheme would quickly diverge and fail.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T02:54:35.636042+00:00