Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC0C4892
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Tue, 16 May 2017 12:24:03 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail149043.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail149043.authsmtp.co.uk
	[62.13.149.43])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D722912A
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Tue, 16 May 2017 12:24:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c232.authsmtp.com (mail-c232.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.232])
	by punt21.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id v4GCO0R9083495;
	Tue, 16 May 2017 13:24:00 +0100 (BST)
Received: from petertodd.org (ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com
	[52.5.185.120]) (authenticated bits=0)
	by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id v4GCNwaV043301
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Tue, 16 May 2017 13:23:59 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D403D400E5;
	Tue, 16 May 2017 12:23:57 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id DCAFF2048A; Tue, 16 May 2017 08:23:53 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 08:23:53 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Alex Mizrahi <alex.mizrahi@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20170516122353.GA5808@fedora-23-dvm>
References: <20170223011147.GB905@savin.petertodd.org>
	<CAE28kUTxc4KPvijiaJQ6M=LDPf_Du1pFdehfTtXtqs0hOtyWTw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pWyiEgJYm5f9v55/"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAE28kUTxc4KPvijiaJQ6M=LDPf_Du1pFdehfTtXtqs0hOtyWTw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-Server-Quench: 8a1b427d-3a32-11e7-829f-00151795d556
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
	http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
	aAdMdwQUFVQNAgsB AmEbWldeUl57XGo7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq
	T0pMXVMcUgEfcmJG V3geVhpxdwQIfXl2 ZwhqD3EJWEZ9IVt+
	E01WCGwHMGB9YGIW Bl1YdwJRcQRDe0tA b1YxNiYHcQ5VPz4z
	GA41ejw8IwAXFBRy CgoKKFcTXUMGGCIn DxwFVTMoAQUDSig/
	ZxVuMVkSAAMfNV8x eUcmEVgVUVcPEQBQ AkUl
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1037:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 52.5.185.120/25
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
	anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
	autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] TXO commitments do not need a soft-fork to be
 useful
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, 16 May 2017 12:24:03 -0000


--pWyiEgJYm5f9v55/
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 03:15:17PM +0300, Alex Mizrahi via bitcoin-dev wrot=
e:
> > Something I've recently realised is that TXO commitments do not need to=
 be
> > implemented as a consensus protocol change to be useful.
>=20
>=20
> You're slow, Peter. I figured this out back in 2013:
>=20
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D153662.10

Lol, good job! And you even figured out that lovely "distributed file syste=
m"
explanation first.

Though, it does look like I'm still the person who made it 100% *clear* the
first time - you're explanation is easy to read the wrong way, particularly
when you say:

"Next time I will teach you how to implement a blockchain-based cryptocurre=
ncy
in such a way that new miners can start mining right away without downloadi=
ng
whole blockchain, stay tuned..."

After all, at the time UTXO commitments had been already discussed. Also,
talking about a DHT in relation to this stuff probably made the explanation=
 get
missed by some people.


Unfortunately, I think this is a good example of how important coming up wi=
th
good explanations and analogies is. :/

--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org

--pWyiEgJYm5f9v55/
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJZGu9WAAoJECSBQD2l8JH7J3wH/jgwJM0Wf2fpfLPhPMY8VpQt
MxfkUNrUgTyYwbibY1mbZ8lJ955d20MjFx6LrRhmeldsIDlLlhawHzdO63smUinu
H0bz2RMoCfPCLXAibrbiIig+tnF5JySKpPy6piXx30YhI+lMqrLAs13rSy4J6wgV
kCCo7j2BjQBCLdgDx1dHSdON93J+bi5lvdh7v+JMEuXxLzN1tjhXcNh21ra3aWaY
bdlh+OC9iPnMz1GZBWoews9vunFvkvYd4N2jQ7u2ttUcDZ+jlgxHpexu/VyXCI0O
/t73EAuUBYuTZMzxT/cQf24RHNPdUQZ6AxrwrPHdUYDPMCFlWTuQTbcI6McYIfU=
=UG19
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--pWyiEgJYm5f9v55/--