Author: Natanael 2015-02-22 13:29:44
Published on: 2015-02-22T13:29:44+00:00
In a conversation from February 2015, Peter Todd discusses the advantages of implementing a general-purpose scripting language improvement in Bitcoin. This would eliminate the reliance on inherently unreliable P2P networking and allow for fidelity bonds to be used as protection against double-spends. The conversation then shifts to the issue of zero-confirmation transactions and the risk involved when creating transactions based on them. The scenario presented involves receiving a zero-confirmation transaction, creating a new transaction based on it and another UTXO, and then having the original transaction invalidated due to a double-spend. The concern is raised that the UTXO_old could be tainted forever due to its association with the invalidated transaction. The question is also posed about whether a transaction involving only currently valid UTXOs can serve as proof of a double-spend, and whether relying on zero-confirmation transactions leaves one vulnerable to miners conspiring with double-spending thieves.Overall, the conversation highlights the potential risks and limitations of relying on zero-confirmation transactions in the Bitcoin network.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T17:38:03.568394+00:00