Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.223.174 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.223.174; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ie0-f174.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <550361CC.7080401@localhost.local>
References: <55034205.4030607@localhost.local>
	<CANEZrP2OM6BrEsgqe5j23qaZp7wypOFJOZf+cNuMMe12WBv8LA@mail.gmail.com>
	<55035EAC.80201@localhost.local>
	<CANEZrP0c04KrpjNTsANPhrK_NchQ+aP=yOtRV+5GMBsKWKREkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<550361CC.7080401@localhost.local>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 15:24:05 -0700
Message-ID: <CANEZrP1UyyL9=UnCeeq27h4W2GiSRtVeJ63s_FT66tOE2rXY+Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Justus Ranvier <justusranvier@riseup.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01229aaa53f4a6051132f56f
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Criminal complaints against "network
 disruption as a service" startups
Precedence: list

--089e01229aaa53f4a6051132f56f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

>
> Don't SPV clients announce their intentions by the act of uploading a
> filter?
>

Well they don't set NODE_NETWORK, so they don't claim to be providing
network services. But then I guess the Chainalysis nodes could easily just
clear that bit flag too.


> What I'd actually like to see is for network users to pay for the node
> resources that they consume


It's not quite pay-as-you-go, but I just posted a scheme for funding of
network resources using crowdfunding contracts here:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/5783#issuecomment-79460064

That comment doesn't have any kind of provision for access control, but
group signatures could be extended in both directions: the server proves it
was a part of the group that was funded by the contract, and the client
proves it was in group that funded the contract, but it's done in a
(relatively) anonymous way. Then any client can use any node it funded, or
at least, buy priority access.

But it's rather complicated. I'd hope that nodes can be like email
accounts: yes they have a cost but in practice people everyone gets one for
free because of random commercial cross-subsidisation, self hosting and
other things.

--089e01229aaa53f4a6051132f56f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left=
-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;paddi=
ng-left:1ex">Don&#39;t SPV clients announce their intentions by the act of =
uploading a<br>
filter?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Well they don&#39;t set NODE_NE=
TWORK, so they don&#39;t claim to be providing network services. But then I=
 guess the Chainalysis nodes could easily just clear that bit flag too.=C2=
=A0</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin=
:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)=
;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">What I&#39;d actually like to se=
e is for network users to pay for the node<br>
resources that they consume</blockquote><div><br></div><div>It&#39;s not qu=
ite pay-as-you-go, but I just posted a scheme for funding of network resour=
ces using crowdfunding contracts here:</div><div><br></div><div><a href=3D"=
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/5783#issuecomment-79460064">https=
://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/5783#issuecomment-79460064</a></div><d=
iv><br></div><div>That comment doesn&#39;t have any kind of provision for a=
ccess control, but group signatures could be extended in both directions: t=
he server proves it was a part of the group that was funded by the contract=
, and the client proves it was in group that funded the contract, but it&#3=
9;s done in a (relatively) anonymous way. Then any client can use any node =
it funded, or at least, buy priority access.</div><div><br></div><div>But i=
t&#39;s rather complicated. I&#39;d hope that nodes can be like email accou=
nts: yes they have a cost but in practice people everyone gets one for free=
 because of random commercial cross-subsidisation, self hosting and other t=
hings.</div></div></div></div>

--089e01229aaa53f4a6051132f56f--