Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A331CDB for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 18:34:59 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [192.3.11.21]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64ADA17E for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 18:34:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:5:265::71]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0011838A0C54; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 18:34:14 +0000 (UTC) X-Hashcash: 1:25:171211:teweldemat@gmail.com::/C4B+StgkGdHuDBw:cw2ch X-Hashcash: 1:25:171211:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::rUchDPtYjqjvCPh1:6O5J From: Luke Dashjr To: Teweldemedhin Aberra , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 18:34:12 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.12.12-gentoo; KDE/4.14.37; x86_64; ; ) References: In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201712111834.13672.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - Dead Man's Switch X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 18:34:59 -0000 You can implement this already, but only for ~1 year expirations. IF ELSE <1 year> CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY ENDIF Perhaps it would make sense to propose a flag extending the range of relative lock-times so you can do several years? Luke On Monday 11 December 2017 5:30:37 PM Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev wrote: > It is estimated that about 4 million of the about 16.4 Bitcoins ever mined > are lost forever because no one knows the private keys of some Bitcoin > addresses. This effectively mean there are actually only 14.4 million > Bitcoins in circulation even though 16.4 million are mined. There is no way > of eliminating the human errors that cause these losses of Bitcoin from > circulation, while the number of Bitcoin that will ever be mined is capped > at 21 million. This means the total number of Bitcoins that are in > circulation will eventually become zero, bringing the network to an end. > > The solution this BIP proposes is to implementing a dead man's switch to > Bitcoin addresses. The dead man's switch causes the Bitcoins assigned to > dormant addresses to automatically expire. A Bitcoin address is deemed > dormant if it is not used in transactions for some fixed length of time, > say ten years. > > The calculation of the miner's reward should take into account the Bitcoins > that has expired. This means there is a possibility that miner's reward can > increase if sufficient number of Bitcoins expire. > > Ref: > > http://fortune.com/2017/11/25/lost-bitcoins/ > > > ign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free. > www.avast.com > ign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>