Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on September 05, 2023, 05:53:49 AM

Quote from: franky1 on September 04, 2023, 02:59:17 PM

funniest part is people say double spending was possible since 2009.. yet there were no large scale complaints of zero-confirm back then.

It's almost like there weren't any big bitcoin services back in 2009. Roll Eyes

The whole of 2009 only had 219 transaction which weren't coinbase transactions.

Quote from: franky1 on September 04, 2023, 02:59:17 PM

where the only main successes is to pushtx a second tx directly to a pool that subsequently bypasses standard policy of 'first seen' to add the second tx before the first tx is used in a block

No, it isn't. As I've already mentioned above, a race attack does not require cooperation from any pool.

Quote from: franky1 on September 04, 2023, 02:59:17 PM

its done to force people not to accept risk/trust of using the mainnet for zero-confirms of any amount anymore

You can still accept zero confirmation transactions if you personally want to do so. Doing so was never safe.

A. PEOPLE SAID.. mainly the PEOPLE from your clan.. trying to exagerate the risk before RBF to sound like there is no difference.. but there was, more people used to trust zero confirms back then. because now that RBF is a feature. its now easier to double spend. much much much easier.

again RBF has made it much more easier to double spend, it used to be safer. but now its not safe