Author: John Carvalho 2022-10-17 06:23:20
Published on: 2022-10-17T06:23:20+00:00
The context discusses the differences between 0conf acceptance and RBF assurances in Bitcoin transactions. While 0conf acceptance can be monitored and enforced by merchants, exposure to double spends can still occur, but the cost of occasional double-spending is less than that of a delayed checkout experience. On the other hand, RBF assurances are optionally enforced by miners, but are not reliable in ensuring the integrity of payments. The feature of RBF incentivizes rollbacks and uncertainty, and has negative consequences on more popular use cases. Despite this, RBF continues to be baked deeper into Bitcoin by the establishment. It is questioned whether a node set that prefers blocks with replaced txns or rejects them is more likely.
Updated on: 2023-05-22T21:46:02.987345+00:00