Author: John Carvalho 2022-12-05 15:19:20
Published on: 2022-12-05T15:19:20+00:00
Bitcoin Core's recent decision to add full Replace-by-Fee (RBF) policy has sparked concerns regarding its potential risks for zero-conf users. However, the author of an article argues that the risk exposure for merchants accepting zero-confirmation transactions is finite and manageable. Opponents of the policy fail to understand this.The article also disputes the notion that full RBF aligns with miner and user incentives. Instead, it can result in more real-world doublespends and ultimately lead to less valuable transactions. According to the author, someone attempting a double-spend attack would not be deterred by losing a few thousand sats. The risk increases non-linearly with the amount of bitcoin being transacted.However, a legitimate business exists that offers insurance/risk management for accepting zero-conf, similar to accepting credit cards with chargeback risk. Full RBF is aligned with miner and user incentives but is a node policy rather than a consensus one.The incentive to run older versions of Bitcoin Core to force non-RBF transactions to be treated as RBF is lower than the likelihood of updating. While Lightning provides a risk-free instant settlement solution, it is not without its own risks. Zero-conf remains a useful tool for improving Lightning onboarding and UX overall.Ultimately, the long-term solution is to either accept the zero-conf risk and cover oneself with an insurance premium or use Lightning for fast payments. The mempoolfullrbf feature should be removed from Bitcoin Core distributions as it disrupts mempool harmony.
Updated on: 2023-05-22T23:01:19.720757+00:00