Attached Transactions - Alternative to Replace By Fee (RBF) - Possibly a way to reduce miner censorship

[krisives]

Hi everyone. With RBF recently getting some exposure I was thinking more about ways to solve the problems that RBF solves without it. In particular, I see the blockchain more as a data structure made up of immutable pieces, and I don't like that RBF violates this to some degree. I would prefer a Bitcoin where people submit things to the network and any attempt to "undo" is a separate transaction.

It's possible my understanding of RBF or Bitcoin has caused me to miss something, but from what I know right now there is no way to submit a transaction that will only be valid if another transaction has already been placed into a block. Currently two parties would have to setup multisig or agree on a private token of some kind or in general cooperate together before the transaction is made.

If there was a system in place where you could "attach" a transaction to another in this way it could solve the problems RBF originally was supposed to solve, which is allowing you to send more to "bump" a transaction. This would be done by making another transaction with a miner fee to incentivize it to be placed into a block.

Likewise this could help solve the problem of miners publishing blocks with zero transactions in them. If each transaction could be "attached" to another in this way it could become very hard to censor a transaction that "the people" do not want censored. This could stop miners from censoring specific wallets or specific transactions unless they are willing to let that censorship balloon into more lost mining fees. Currently, we don't have any kind of censorship like this, but we do have lazy miners that produce small blocks about 6 times a day (I wrote a small tool here: https://fullblocks.github.io )

Please let me know if there is any way to do this currently or any BIPs that would allow for this.

Thanks everyone,
Kris

[krisives]

Since no discussion was happening here I also started a topic on BitcoinTalk forums:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1372028

Overall I don't see much interest / nobody seems to care about the problem of miner censorship. I'll keep bumping the threads every week or so.

[krisives]

Worth mentioning Theymos is talking about censoring txs today:

It's probably also possible to just identify this spammer's transactions and block them directly.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/commen ... am/d0izum5

[krisives]

Peter Todd discusses here a scheme where miners may be bribed into rejecting txs that don't include identity information:

https://petertodd.org/2016/mit-chainanc ... te-bitcoin