1 2016-03-30 11:07:44 <Luke-Jr> cfields: if you get a chance, can you advise on https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=877081.msg14362386#msg14362386 ?
2 2016-03-30 11:51:55 <jl2012> if i want to return the size and hash of every txs in the blockchain to log during block validation, where should i do it? main.cpp?
3 2016-03-30 15:00:53 <elichai2> Hi
4 2016-03-30 15:01:27 <elichai2> Bitcoin node filters conflicting txs from the mempool?
5 2016-03-30 15:08:07 <wumpus> yes the memory pool is always self-consistent
6 2016-03-30 15:13:29 <elichai2> wumpus, so there can't be conflicting txs inside the mempool, right?
7 2016-03-30 15:16:52 <instagibbs> elichai2, correct, everything in mempool could be stuck into a block if you were mining
8 2016-03-30 15:17:35 <wumpus> no, there can't. Mempool transactions are never conflicting, and the inputs are always known (either by also being in the mempool, or in the utxo set)
9 2016-03-30 15:21:09 <elichai2> so, if My node get a conflicting tx does it forward it's to other nodes? or it ignores it at all?
10 2016-03-30 15:22:44 <wumpus> it will reject it - unless the tranaction opts in to RBF, and so do the transactions that it's replacing
11 2016-03-30 15:23:18 <wumpus> but otehrwise it will see conflicting transactions as invalid and not forward them
12 2016-03-30 15:24:26 <elichai2> wumpus, so technically if I forward a specific tx to all of the live nodes no one can double spend it? (except a miner himself)
13 2016-03-30 15:25:56 <wumpus> that depends on the policies of miners
14 2016-03-30 15:26:43 <wumpus> in principle, if all miners would only mine the first transaction they see spending certain inputs, sending a transaction to all miners would be enough. But in practice it's pretty messy.
15 2016-03-30 15:26:53 <wumpus> don't rely on it
16 2016-03-30 15:31:04 <elichai2> wumpus, but they will never get that transaction if no one is forwarding it
17 2016-03-30 15:39:24 <wumpus> if, yes. But, say, there may be ways to forward to them directly, not through the P2P network.
18 2016-03-30 15:44:56 <wumpus> you shouldn't rely 100% on node/miner policy, they are at individual node's discretion and may change at any time. Of course you can take a risk, but you should see it as a risk, and it depends on how much you trust the sender of the tranasaction and how much is at stake.
19 2016-03-30 15:50:53 <elichai2> wumpus, that's the thing, I did succeed on making a double spend with using only peter todd's script