Bitcoin Forum
September 20, 2019, 12:26:06 AM *
News: If you like a topic and you see an orange "bump" link, click it. More info.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: The downsides of OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY?  (Read 101 times)
MadGamer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442
Merit: 1025


Fun of WINBIX sales system winbix.io


View Profile
March 12, 2018, 08:12:39 AM
 #1

The reason I'm asking this is because apparently, this was created by Peter Todd in 2014 according to GitHub and yet, no one implemented this except for Coinb.in even though It's very useful and from my understanding, this is better then nLockTime where basically the transaction becomes valid after certain period of time while with OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY the coins are not even spendable.


   ▃▆█▀███████████████████▆
  ████████
█████████████████████▄
 █████████████
██████████████████▌
█████████████████
▀███████████████
█████████████████████
▀███████████
█████████████████████
▄██████████
█████████████████
▄██████████████
██████████████
▄██████████████████
████████████
█████████████████████
██████████████
▀██████████████████
██████████████████
▀██████████████
██████████████████████▄
▀█████████
█████████████████████
▄███████████
█████████████████
▄▄██████████████
 ████████████
▄▄█████████████████▌
  ███████
▄████████████████████▀
    ▀█
▄██████████████████████▀
`▄▄``````▄``````▄▄``▄▄```▄`````````▄````▄▄▄▄▄▄▄```````▄```▄`````````▄
 ██     ███     ██  ██   ██▄      ▐█▌  ▐█▀▀▀▀▀▀██    ▐█   ██▌     ▄██
 ▐█▌   ▐███▌   ██   ██   ████     ▐█▌  ▐█       ██   ▐█    ▀██   ██
  ██   ██ ██   ██   ██   █▌ ▀█▄   ▐█▌  ▐█      ▄██   ▐█      ██▄██
   ██ ▐█▀ ▀█▌ ██    ██   █▌   ██  ▐█▌  ▐█    ████    ▐█       ███
   ▐█▄██   ██▄█▌    ██   █▌    ██▄▐█▌  ▐█       ▐██  ▐█     ▄█▀ ██
    ███     ███     ██   █▌      ███▌  ▐█       ▄██  ▐█    ██    ▀██
     ██     ██▌     ██   █▌       ██▌  ▐█  ███████   ▐█  ▐█▌       ██

S A L E S   S Y S T E M




             ▄██
           ▄████           ▄▄
         ▄███▐██        ▄████
▄██████████  ▐██    ▄████▀
███▀▀▀▀▀▀    ▐██    ▀█▀
███          ▐██
███``````````▐██````██████████
███          ▐██
██████████   ▐██    ██▄
        ▀███▄▐██     ▀████▄
          ▀█████        ▀████▌
            ▀███

       ▀█▀▀▀▀▀▀█▌
        ███▀▀███
     ▄█▀        ▀█▄
   ▄█              █▄
  ██     ▄████▄     ▀█
 ██     ▐█ ▐█ ▐▀     ▐█
▐█       ▀▀███▄       █▌
▐▌``````▐▄`▐█`█▌```````▄
▐█       ▀▀██▀▀       █▌
 ▀█                  ██
   ▀█▄            ▄█▀
       ▀▀▀████▀▀▀▀


Telegram
Whitepaper
PLAY NOW
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1568939166
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1568939166

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1568939166
Reply with quote  #2

1568939166
Report to moderator
1568939166
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1568939166

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1568939166
Reply with quote  #2

1568939166
Report to moderator
1568939166
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1568939166

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1568939166
Reply with quote  #2

1568939166
Report to moderator
pebwindkraft
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 259
Merit: 253


View Profile
March 12, 2018, 08:24:14 AM
 #2

Quote
no one implemented this except for Coinb.in
what do you mean by this ?
You don't need to implement anything, you are free to create "your own" transaction and make use of the opcode. It is clear that OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY is heavily used in lightning setups, to create payment channels. Are you looking for a similiar use case for OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY?
suzanne5223
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 283



View Profile
March 12, 2018, 09:19:04 AM
Last edit: March 12, 2018, 04:25:10 PM by suzanne5223
 #3

Yes, no one implemented the except the mention wallet but the Ligntning Network are going to be the second to implement it and one of the down sides of the OP code is that it is not advisable to reuse the address used to withdraw before.

          ▄▄████▄▄
      ▄▄███▀    ▀███▄▄
   ▄████████▄▄▄▄████████▄
  ▀██████████████████████▀
▐█▄▄ ▀▀████▀    ▀████▀▀ ▄▄██
▐█████▄▄ ▀██▄▄▄▄██▀ ▄▄██▀  █
▐██ ▀████▄▄ ▀██▀ ▄▄████  ▄██
▐██  ███████▄  ▄████████████
▐██  █▌▐█ ▀██  ██████▀  ████
▐██  █▌▐█  ██  █████  ▄█████
 ███▄ ▌▐█  ██  ████████████▀
  ▀▀████▄ ▄██  ██▀  ████▀▀
      ▀▀█████  █  ▄██▀▀
         ▀▀██  ██▀▀
.WINDICE.████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
████
      ▄████████▀
     ▄████████
    ▄███████▀
   ▄███████▀
  ▄█████████████
 ▄████████████▀
▄███████████▀
     █████▀
    ████▀
   ████
  ███▀
 ██▀
█▀

██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
     ▄▄█████▄   ▄▄▄▄
    ██████████▄███████▄
  ▄████████████████████▌
 ████████████████████████
▐████████████████████████▌
 ▀██████████████████████▀
     ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
     ▄█     ▄█     ▄█
   ▄██▌   ▄██▌   ▄██▌
   ▀▀▀    ▀▀▀    ▀▀▀
       ▄█     ▄█
     ▄██▌   ▄██▌
     ▀▀▀    ▀▀▀

██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
                   ▄█▄
                 ▄█████▄
                █████████▄
       ▄       ██ ████████▌
     ▄███▄    ▐█▌▐█████████
   ▄███████▄   ██ ▀███████▀
 ▄███████████▄  ▀██▄▄████▀
▐█ ▄███████████    ▀▀▀▀
█ █████████████▌      ▄
█▄▀████████████▌    ▄███▄
▐█▄▀███████████    ▐█▐███▌
 ▀██▄▄▀▀█████▀      ▀█▄█▀
   ▀▀▀███▀▀▀
████
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
████


▄▄████████▄▄
▄████████████████▄
▄████████████████████▄
███████████████▀▀  █████
████████████▀▀      ██████
▐████████▀▀   ▄▄     ██████▌
▐████▀▀    ▄█▀▀     ███████▌
▐████████ █▀        ███████▌
████████ █ ▄███▄   ███████
████████████████▄▄██████
▀████████████████████▀
▀████████████████▀
▀▀████████▀▀
██████
██████
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
██████
██████
.Play Now.██████
██████
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
██████
██████
[/table
ETFbitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 2029

Use SegWit and enjoy lower fees.


View Profile WWW
March 12, 2018, 03:15:57 PM
 #4

It's true that nLockTime is outdated and have some bugs, but as far as i know OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY only fix a bug from nLockTime which make sure no one can spend the UXTO before specific date/block height. nLockTime and OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can be used together, even though i don't know the advantage.

Also, majority of Bitcoiner/Bitcoin service don't need this feature, usually only LN,similar 2nd layer channel or fully-automated services which need this feature.

Panthers52
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 675
Merit: 501


#SuperBowl50 #NFCchamps


View Profile WWW
March 13, 2018, 06:32:01 AM
 #5

nLockTime is specific to the subject transaction. This means if you sign a transaction with an nLockTime, that transaction cannot confirm in a block prior to that constraint.

OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY on the other hand, restrict outputs of a transaction from being spent prior to a certain constraint. There are very different use cases for OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY than for nLockTime. If a customer is withdrawing funds from a service, there is no real reason why the service would want to restrict the customer from spending their withdrawal anything other than immediately.

As mentioned above, OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY will be used with LN and other similar payment channels. It is likely that OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY was soft-forked into Bitcoin with LN/payments channels in mind.

PGP 827D2A60

Tired of annoying signature ads? Ad block for signatures
pebwindkraft
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 259
Merit: 253


View Profile
March 13, 2018, 08:13:27 AM
 #6

I‘d like to see the proof for statements like „no one uses it“ from the several posters here. I guess this is more a proof of ignorance, than a review of the blockchain and its scripts in transactions. The OP_Code provides beneficial solution to manage all kinds of Time linked smart contracts, as discussed in a longer thread here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2204938.msg23664225#msg23664225

Last recently I created some bitcoin transactions with a „holding time“ of one year, so that tax declaration will be positive, and I don‘t spend by accident some bitcoins, which I have less than a year. They would be expensive in tax declaration...

So it is up to everyone’s own imagination, to see positive value in new developments (like CLTV), or to stay behind and live with the existing environment.

Maybe also a change in the headline: more to something like „I don‘t understand what CLTV is used for“ or similar. Otherwise it just sounds like something is judged, which isn‘t understood, and this is usually considered a silly thing...
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!