summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorCryptAxe <cryptaxe@gmail.com>2017-10-10 13:49:20 -0700
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2017-10-10 20:49:24 +0000
commit1849473ea14baed63924c7cba31a413c06a883fb (patch)
tree4a96410970cd2803e55bc2922add4d7518dd4a20
parent74c4de15662f648f186124a9950d7634f5e4619b (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-1849473ea14baed63924c7cba31a413c06a883fb.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-1849473ea14baed63924c7cba31a413c06a883fb.zip
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Generalized sharding protocol for decentralized scaling without Miners owning our BTC
-rw-r--r--05/c86b99a4733153d98c43a2d0417d3095b5c0bf550
1 files changed, 550 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/05/c86b99a4733153d98c43a2d0417d3095b5c0bf b/05/c86b99a4733153d98c43a2d0417d3095b5c0bf
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..3fe5da211
--- /dev/null
+++ b/05/c86b99a4733153d98c43a2d0417d3095b5c0bf
@@ -0,0 +1,550 @@
+Return-Path: <cryptaxe@gmail.com>
+Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
+ [172.17.192.35])
+ by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B9B1A67
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:49:24 +0000 (UTC)
+X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
+Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com (mail-wm0-f41.google.com [74.125.82.41])
+ by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1075E432
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:49:22 +0000 (UTC)
+Received: by mail-wm0-f41.google.com with SMTP id i124so493667wmf.3
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Tue, 10 Oct 2017 13:49:22 -0700 (PDT)
+DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
+ h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
+ :cc; bh=+IF+/Ctk+oDTkR9oQkVRiTumKRRDdn3nI+dU9uY29s4=;
+ b=LO6qspBokduDnF+hUJUypPyjAukZ1omrW++Yy2p2ECKug70AVe3Mz9S4uJLVJhOlBd
+ Y8Hey0+gvE2p2sFeRWFuOfKBH6GOWoZjMhZ3F9J0OuzgtdzR3hwuYF0u+qUA9Lbhtm5Q
+ PZ5Cm7S+RqzqN8ZYK5b68/+odq18F6/ckBTh5F0mNAX03o2Zht/Whpf3YxxZUEB8VEJt
+ c3shs0SVck5+7TIhJ0MEXkrMn0Hq81gTDyf/WokqOD6ByleIE16yXCvzBFYbtmVBuAuS
+ RuG/xE36/0Yb1e38IJxZK4VU/7jrOrf/TrIQrK57izOqmq0vfSQW5KWDNUkQAjaU8/RG
+ 672Q==
+X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
+ d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
+ h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
+ :message-id:subject:to:cc;
+ bh=+IF+/Ctk+oDTkR9oQkVRiTumKRRDdn3nI+dU9uY29s4=;
+ b=c2f0tCAdprurcbUZBY+77/I546mZ9gEZbL7DhX/W+9SXfr0B8Mf2cwSO8po2B/Wxpu
+ 5RRjBoqq+H/gSq3z6HMNjH952wkuJ3ysyvgbwbQVXQWDSKKVh9XqML0AXX4x8V7G5kpp
+ qRktqSgRUuz9AIjZF8k8YuAwU190CHhzSz8dvEwWCdG/B80TQoTl9UOcuFhN94jykLgE
+ GnhYyL4jX0hQlDXftsC7nQD/dm/wTzA6njQM0GCdWreEubwH62fMJT+7uG6tceubFyXE
+ RCNQmNJs/X3VIUE/RvdE4Q3kMGJI7pHQrSWQG06XWbHyXOkhLJO+8AS9FwbdKyiPkcJs
+ 8J3g==
+X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaXZ1lUuLxorssSh64IWNB4RH3duuPMPgNH7n0sp+4EtCzjDgh71
+ iFMVjzlqnx1lItFw1+wWBk2+bfV1EmRZOr1rQf+fkQdu
+X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QDcOwEb5WobOeN6ZYtauf8eeu2am8eDsH1ubKIAzURIfajl9ZMueR26HmLTGcdR6SWyV6BIA+SKL1s33mqijEU=
+X-Received: by 10.28.170.208 with SMTP id t199mr13397461wme.4.1507668561389;
+ Tue, 10 Oct 2017 13:49:21 -0700 (PDT)
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+Received: by 10.28.196.79 with HTTP; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 13:49:20 -0700 (PDT)
+Received: by 10.28.196.79 with HTTP; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 13:49:20 -0700 (PDT)
+In-Reply-To: <C216A90B-D08D-4B89-98EE-761ED303F180@taoeffect.com>
+References: <16D7672F-AA36-47D7-AAEF-E767B9CE09FF@taoeffect.com>
+ <CA+XQW1jf-6HCic4beV5GSix8KRzJ-7nTc-ePipfs=ouwvHX0jA@mail.gmail.com>
+ <55CAABF4-4FB8-4230-8E51-014C1D347D72@taoeffect.com>
+ <CA+XQW1i-3dfRGr2vy=_P0BuXNbnoR_OmmOGGOmCcNEgkZeT_gg@mail.gmail.com>
+ <FBD96A02-243E-4E09-9204-EC90DE5EE576@taoeffect.com>
+ <daf438d1-7cca-aa0f-6bf7-3eef0d765d49@gmail.com>
+ <B79CD106-A06E-4AF1-B67E-6DFE557468F8@taoeffect.com>
+ <CAF5CFkg71g5vTCQ3rcbN+7Cjx_B3z7NT78Ug6a6S=KiSS8yo-A@mail.gmail.com>
+ <B822901D-C074-4987-B793-2A83C8C83EAF@taoeffect.com>
+ <F437D8FA-892B-46C7-B0B8-8B5487DD8034@gmail.com>
+ <C216A90B-D08D-4B89-98EE-761ED303F180@taoeffect.com>
+From: CryptAxe <cryptaxe@gmail.com>
+Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 13:49:20 -0700
+Message-ID: <CAF5CFkjz5WvkR_4HL2NSevDzHsG_LUTsYS_A9BHcOQctSynQoQ@mail.gmail.com>
+To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
+ Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com>
+Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114430780a718b055b3771cf"
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
+ DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
+ RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
+X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
+ smtp1.linux-foundation.org
+X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:59:30 +0000
+Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Generalized sharding protocol for decentralized
+ scaling without Miners owning our BTC
+X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
+Precedence: list
+List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
+List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
+List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
+List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
+X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:49:24 -0000
+
+--001a114430780a718b055b3771cf
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+
+You could technically call myself and Chris 'core developers'. You don't
+get to have a fixed rate of Bitcoin and a second way to mint coins at the
+same time.
+
+On Oct 10, 2017 1:46 PM, "Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev" <
+bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
+
+> What?
+>
+> That is not correct.
+>
+> There is a fixed amount of Bitcoin, as I said.
+>
+> The only difference is what chain it is on.
+>
+> It is precisely because there is a fixed amount that when you
+> burn-to-withdraw you mint on another chain.
+>
+> I will not respond to any more emails unless they=E2=80=99re from core de=
+velopers.
+> Gotta run.
+>
+> --
+> Sent from my mobile device.
+> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing
+> with the NSA.
+>
+> > On Oct 10, 2017, at 1:23 PM, James Hudon <jameshudon@gmail.com> wrote:
+> >
+> > You're asking for newly minted bitcoin to go to you but you burned the
+> bitcoin used in the peg. You're effectively losing your money and then
+> stealing from the miners to gain it back. The miners had to issue your
+> amount of bitcoin 2 times (once for your original bitcoin, again to make
+> you whole). Why would they agree to this?
+> > --
+> > hudon
+> >
+> >> On Oct 10, 2017, at 13:13, Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev <
+> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
+> >>
+> >> It would not change the number of Bitcoins in existence.
+> >>
+> >> --
+> >> Sent from my mobile device.
+> >> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also
+> sharing with the NSA.
+> >>
+> >>> On Oct 10, 2017, at 12:50 PM, CryptAxe <cryptaxe@gmail.com> wrote:
+> >>>
+> >>> Your method would change the number of Bitcoins in existence. Why?
+> >>>
+> >>> On Oct 10, 2017 12:47 PM, "Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev" <
+> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
+> >>> Is that what passes for a technical argument these days? Sheesh.
+> >>>
+> >>> Whereas in Drivechain users are forced to give up their coins to a
+> single group for whatever sidechains they interact with, the generic
+> sharding algo lets them (1) keep their coins, (2) trust whatever group th=
+ey
+> want to trust (the miners of the various sidechains).
+> >>>
+> >>> Drivechain offers objectively worse security.
+> >>>
+> >>> --
+> >>> Sent from my mobile device.
+> >>> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also
+> sharing with the NSA.
+> >>>
+> >>>> On Oct 10, 2017, at 8:09 AM, Paul Sztorc via bitcoin-dev <
+> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
+> >>>>
+> >>>> I think this response speaks for itself.
+> >>>>
+> >>>>> On 10/10/2017 10:09 AM, Tao Effect wrote:
+> >>>>> Hi Paul,
+> >>>>>
+> >>>>> I thought it was clear, but apparently you are getting stuck on the
+> semantics of the word "burn".
+> >>>>>
+> >>>>> The "burning" applies to the original coins you had.
+> >>>>>
+> >>>>> When you transfer them back, you get newly minted coins, equivalent
+> to the amount you "burned" on the chain you're transferring from =E2=80=
+=95 as
+> stated in the OP.
+> >>>>>
+> >>>>> If you don't like the word "burn", pick another one.
+> >>>>>
+> >>>>> --
+> >>>>> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also
+> sharing with the NSA.
+> >>>>>
+> >>>>>> On Oct 10, 2017, at 4:20 AM, Paul Sztorc <truthcoin@gmail.com>
+> wrote:
+> >>>>>>
+> >>>>>> Haha, no. Because you "burned" the coins.
+> >>>>>>
+> >>>>>> On Oct 10, 2017 1:20 AM, "Tao Effect" <contact@taoeffect.com>
+> wrote:
+> >>>>>> Paul,
+> >>>>>>
+> >>>>>> It's a two-way peg.
+> >>>>>>
+> >>>>>> There's nothing preventing transfers back to the main chain.
+> >>>>>>
+> >>>>>> They work in the exact same manner.
+> >>>>>>
+> >>>>>> Cheers,
+> >>>>>> Greg
+> >>>>>>
+> >>>>>> --
+> >>>>>> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also
+> sharing with the NSA.
+> >>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> On Oct 9, 2017, at 6:39 PM, Paul Sztorc <truthcoin@gmail.com>
+> wrote:
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> That is only a one-way peg, not a two-way.
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> In fact, that is exactly what drivechain does, if one chooses
+> parameters for the drivechain that make it impossible for any side-to-mai=
+n
+> transfer to succeed.
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> One-way pegs have strong first-mover disadvantages.
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> Paul
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> On Oct 9, 2017 9:24 PM, "Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev" <
+> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
+> >>>>>>> Dear list,
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> In previous arguments over Drivechain (and Drivechain-like
+> proposals) I promised that better scaling proposals =E2=80=95 that do not=
+ sacrifice
+> Bitcoin's security =E2=80=95 would come along.
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> I planned to do a detailed writeup, but have decided to just send
+> off this email with what I have, because I'm unlikely to have time to wri=
+te
+> up a detailed proposal.
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> The idea is very simple (and by no means novel*), and I'm sure
+> others have mentioned either exactly it, or similar ideas (e.g. burning
+> coins) before.
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> This is a generic sharding protocol for all blockchains, includin=
+g
+> Bitcoin.
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> Users simply say: "My coins on Chain A are going to be sent to
+> Chain B".
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> Then they burn the coins on Chain A, and create a minting
+> transaction on Chain B. The details of how to ensure that coins do not ge=
+t
+> lost needs to be worked out, but I'm fairly certain the folks on this lis=
+t
+> can figure out those details.
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> - Thin clients, nodes, and miners, can all very easily verify tha=
+t
+> said action took place, and therefore accept the "newly minted" coins on =
+B
+> as valid.
+> >>>>>>> - Users client software now also knows where to look for the othe=
+r
+> coins (if for some reason it needs to).
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> This doesn't even need much modification to the Bitcoin protocol
+> as most of the verification is done client-side.
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> It is fully decentralized, and there's no need to give our
+> ownership of our coins to miners to get scale.
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> My sincere apologies if this has been brought up before (in which
+> case, I would be very grateful for a link to the proposal).
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> Cheers,
+> >>>>>>> Greg Slepak
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> * This idea is similar in spirit to Interledger.
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> --
+> >>>>>>> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also
+> sharing with the NSA.
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
+> >>>>>>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
+> >>>>>>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+> >>>>>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>>
+> >>>>>>
+> >>>>>
+> >>>>
+> >>>> _______________________________________________
+> >>>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
+> >>>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+> >>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
+> >>>
+> >>> _______________________________________________
+> >>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
+> >>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+> >>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
+> >>>
+> >> _______________________________________________
+> >> bitcoin-dev mailing list
+> >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+> >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
+> >
+>
+> _______________________________________________
+> bitcoin-dev mailing list
+> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
+>
+
+--001a114430780a718b055b3771cf
+Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+
+<div dir=3D"auto">You could technically call myself and Chris &#39;core dev=
+elopers&#39;. You don&#39;t get to have a fixed rate of Bitcoin and a secon=
+d way to mint coins at the same time.=C2=A0</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"=
+><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Oct 10, 2017 1:46 PM, &quot;Tao Effect v=
+ia bitcoin-dev&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundatio=
+n.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br type=3D"attr=
+ibution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;borde=
+r-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">What?<br>
+<br>
+That is not correct.<br>
+<br>
+There is a fixed amount of Bitcoin, as I said.<br>
+<br>
+The only difference is what chain it is on.<br>
+<br>
+It is precisely because there is a fixed amount that when you burn-to-withd=
+raw you mint on another chain.<br>
+<br>
+I will not respond to any more emails unless they=E2=80=99re from core deve=
+lopers. Gotta run.<br>
+<br>
+--<br>
+Sent from my mobile device.<br>
+Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing w=
+ith the NSA.<br>
+<br>
+&gt; On Oct 10, 2017, at 1:23 PM, James Hudon &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:jameshu=
+don@gmail.com">jameshudon@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
+&gt;<br>
+&gt; You&#39;re asking for newly minted bitcoin to go to you but you burned=
+ the bitcoin used in the peg. You&#39;re effectively losing your money and =
+then stealing from the miners to gain it back. The miners had to issue your=
+ amount of bitcoin 2 times (once for your original bitcoin, again to make y=
+ou whole). Why would they agree to this?<br>
+&gt; --<br>
+&gt; hudon<br>
+&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt; On Oct 10, 2017, at 13:13, Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a href=
+=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.<wbr>li=
+nuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
+&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt; It would not change the number of Bitcoins in existence.<br>
+&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt; --<br>
+&gt;&gt; Sent from my mobile device.<br>
+&gt;&gt; Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also =
+sharing with the NSA.<br>
+&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt; On Oct 10, 2017, at 12:50 PM, CryptAxe &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:c=
+ryptaxe@gmail.com">cryptaxe@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt; Your method would change the number of Bitcoins in existence. =
+Why?<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt; On Oct 10, 2017 12:47 PM, &quot;Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev&quo=
+t; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev=
+@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt; Is that what passes for a technical argument these days? Shees=
+h.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt; Whereas in Drivechain users are forced to give up their coins =
+to a single group for whatever sidechains they interact with, the generic s=
+harding algo lets them (1) keep their coins, (2) trust whatever group they =
+want to trust (the miners of the various sidechains).<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt; Drivechain offers objectively worse security.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt; --<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt; Sent from my mobile device.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt; Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable a=
+lso sharing with the NSA.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; On Oct 10, 2017, at 8:09 AM, Paul Sztorc via bitcoin-dev &=
+lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lis=
+ts.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; I think this response speaks for itself.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; On 10/10/2017 10:09 AM, Tao Effect wrote:<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Hi Paul,<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; I thought it was clear, but apparently you are getting=
+ stuck on the semantics of the word &quot;burn&quot;.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; The &quot;burning&quot; applies to the original coins =
+you had.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; When you transfer them back, you get newly minted coin=
+s, equivalent to the amount you &quot;burned&quot; on the chain you&#39;re =
+transferring from =E2=80=95 as stated in the OP.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; If you don&#39;t like the word &quot;burn&quot;, pick =
+another one.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; --<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Please do not email me anything that you are not comfo=
+rtable also sharing with the NSA.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; On Oct 10, 2017, at 4:20 AM, Paul Sztorc &lt;<a hr=
+ef=3D"mailto:truthcoin@gmail.com">truthcoin@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Haha, no. Because you &quot;burned&quot; the coins=
+.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; On Oct 10, 2017 1:20 AM, &quot;Tao Effect&quot; &l=
+t;<a href=3D"mailto:contact@taoeffect.com">contact@taoeffect.com</a>&gt; wr=
+ote:<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Paul,<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; It&#39;s a two-way peg.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; There&#39;s nothing preventing transfers back to t=
+he main chain.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; They work in the exact same manner.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Cheers,<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Greg<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; --<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Please do not email me anything that you are not c=
+omfortable also sharing with the NSA.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; On Oct 9, 2017, at 6:39 PM, Paul Sztorc &lt;<a=
+ href=3D"mailto:truthcoin@gmail.com">truthcoin@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; That is only a one-way peg, not a two-way.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; In fact, that is exactly what drivechain does,=
+ if one chooses parameters for the drivechain that make it impossible for a=
+ny side-to-main transfer to succeed.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; One-way pegs have strong first-mover disadvant=
+ages.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Paul<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; On Oct 9, 2017 9:24 PM, &quot;Tao Effect via b=
+itcoin-dev&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.or=
+g">bitcoin-dev@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Dear list,<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; In previous arguments over Drivechain (and Dri=
+vechain-like proposals) I promised that better scaling proposals =E2=80=95 =
+that do not sacrifice Bitcoin&#39;s security =E2=80=95 would come along.<br=
+>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; I planned to do a detailed writeup, but have d=
+ecided to just send off this email with what I have, because I&#39;m unlike=
+ly to have time to write up a detailed proposal.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; The idea is very simple (and by no means novel=
+*), and I&#39;m sure others have mentioned either exactly it, or similar id=
+eas (e.g. burning coins) before.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; This is a generic sharding protocol for all bl=
+ockchains, including Bitcoin.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Users simply say: &quot;My coins on Chain A ar=
+e going to be sent to Chain B&quot;.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Then they burn the coins on Chain A, and creat=
+e a minting transaction on Chain B. The details of how to ensure that coins=
+ do not get lost needs to be worked out, but I&#39;m fairly certain the fol=
+ks on this list can figure out those details.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; - Thin clients, nodes, and miners, can all ver=
+y easily verify that said action took place, and therefore accept the &quot=
+;newly minted&quot; coins on B as valid.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; - Users client software now also knows where t=
+o look for the other coins (if for some reason it needs to).<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; This doesn&#39;t even need much modification t=
+o the Bitcoin protocol as most of the verification is done client-side.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; It is fully decentralized, and there&#39;s no =
+need to give our ownership of our coins to miners to get scale.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; My sincere apologies if this has been brought =
+up before (in which case, I would be very grateful for a link to the propos=
+al).<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Cheers,<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Greg Slepak<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; * This idea is similar in spirit to Interledge=
+r.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; --<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Please do not email me anything that you are n=
+ot comfortable also sharing with the NSA.<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; ______________________________<wbr>___________=
+______<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfound=
+ation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; <a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/m=
+ailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://l=
+ists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">b=
+itcoin-dev@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; <a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listi=
+nfo/bitcoin-dev" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfo=
+undation.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt; ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt; bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt; <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitco=
+in-dev@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt; <a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/=
+bitcoin-dev" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfounda=
+tion.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
+&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
+&gt;&gt; ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
+&gt;&gt; bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
+&gt;&gt; <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-d=
+ev@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
+&gt;&gt; <a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc=
+oin-dev" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation=
+.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
+&gt;<br>
+<br>
+______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
+bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
+<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
+<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
+<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
+rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
+/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
+</blockquote></div></div>
+
+--001a114430780a718b055b3771cf--
+