Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
	designates 62.13.148.108 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=62.13.148.108; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
	helo=outmail148108.authsmtp.net; 
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <201410020055.37347.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <20141001130826.GM28710@savin.petertodd.org>
	<201410011823.56441.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CE356B97-E5AC-4A04-B67C-A542D070F1C5@petertodd.org>
	<201410020055.37347.luke@dashjr.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 18:09:01 -0700
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
Message-ID: <B3CB4356-7F37-44D3-916B-7A591A1DBBEF@petertodd.org>
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [BIP draft] CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY -
	Prevent	a txout from being spent until an expiration time
Precedence: list

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256


On 1 October 2014 17:55:36 GMT-07:00, Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
>On Thursday, October 02, 2014 12:05:15 AM Peter Todd wrote:
>> On 1 October 2014 11:23:55 GMT-07:00, Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
>wrote:
>> >Thoughts on some way to have the stack item be incremented by the
>> >height at
>> >which the scriptPubKey was in a block?
>>
>> Better to create a GET-TXIN-BLOCK-(TIME/HEIGHT)-EQUALVERIFY operator.
>> scriptPubKey would be:
>>     GET-TXIN-BLOCKHEIGHT-EQUALVERIFY
>> (fails unless top stack item is equal to the txin block height)
>>     <delta height> ADD
>> (top stack item is now txin height + delta height)
>>     CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY
>
>This sounds do-able, although it doesn't address using timestamps.

For timestamps replace "height" with "time" in the above example; the minimum block time rule will prevent gaming it.


>> You'd want these sacrifices to unlock years into the future to
>thoroughly
>> exceed any reasonable business cycle; that's so far into the future
>that
>> miners are almost certain to just mine them and collect the fees.
>
>For many use cases, short maturity periods are just as appropriate IMO.

Very easy to incentivise mining centralisation with short maturities. I personally think just destroying coins is better, but it doesn't sit well with people so this is the next best thing.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: APG v1.1.1

iQFQBAEBCAA6BQJULKWsMxxQZXRlciBUb2RkIChsb3cgc2VjdXJpdHkga2V5KSA8
cGV0ZUBwZXRlcnRvZGQub3JnPgAKCRAZnIM7qOfwhcg8CACueZNGfWaZR+xyG9/o
JwDBCnqOtwr6Bnosg3vNcRIDUnmsh+Qkk5dk2JpqYNYw7C3duhlwHshgsGOFkHEV
f5RHDwkzGLJDLXrBwxxcIDdm3cJL8UVpQzJ7dD7aSnfj7MU/0aru3HaIU2ZfymUb
63jhul6FGbXH3K6p3bOoNrfIrCCGOv8jOIzeAgxNPydk8MVPgRhlYLAKBJxu8nMr
1oJGeaKVSGSPSrRdgS8tI4uOs0F4Q49APrLPGxGTERlATmWrr+asHGJTIxsB2IEm
vrNgVRpkaN4Of9k96qzD9ReKfBfqm0WQKLolcXCVqGpdoHcvXh2AeWdjB/EFTyOq
SOgO
=WybM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----