Author: Adam Back 2013-11-04 11:10:38
Published on: 2013-11-04T11:10:38+00:00
In an email exchange between Bitcoin developers, Adam Back suggested that it might be more secure to ensure that everything stays the same with the exception of one address receiving a different amount. Although this could lead to a privacy leak, he argues that it is worth doing to make transactions simpler and easier to validate. Meanwhile, Peter Todd suggested in response that more robust privacy fixes are needed independently, rather than focusing on revising fees or damaging the 0-conf feature. Todd also suggests that replace-for-fee could prepare infrastructure for eventual replace-by-fee usage while avoiding politics around zero-conf transactions. The discussion also mentions that estimates are imperfect and always will be, and that backup is a good thing.
Updated on: 2023-06-07T19:04:53.246687+00:00