Return-Path: Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E465C000B for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 13:44:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 751186061A for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 13:44:31 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.602 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OhTJFp7THf-i for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 13:44:30 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail-oi1-x232.google.com (mail-oi1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::232]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 339CA605E7 for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 13:44:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi1-x232.google.com with SMTP id x196so10576316oif.10 for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 06:44:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=quA6XhOfZVGR+Q7j2AFpRfcgi9x5iDNgdsKzwWb2jTw=; b=Ni31LTKleOF6MzRbW9jibE4Beaa33PXkRP7T3eS5cc+HPBpMh6UHd29eEUSWlQ9zC7 iBZBDq7BHkhaVuD8gpT7EOCUkSDzuW4n0qgxC4DTk9/SOgBfaikO9uO+gtcDUB4x9Box lgrpEVFzHqDmbmZgOUH4950HOuveiuTWdYzbsVFkgHEmZCBE8Kcn0/ZKYNq2wdsuzQqX 2v5CwSAoo6V8xuAoid527R1jtkDGj9VDH8PNTWt2jeC0gUiE3qpwtYEnEQie8fEL93/U kX9aRgjjAc1h6xAJzvbn8scMSpCgX9JUpYIbQ8PMyYsWa8QYWGcPVAUWQXxqhMbydoXQ ESgA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=quA6XhOfZVGR+Q7j2AFpRfcgi9x5iDNgdsKzwWb2jTw=; b=VMVwa7Qu7EXzBMycN/d2hQzjR9fpXX6YZehT9alQb6835tPyX4Xo2Yl/hbLakghclQ hXrafk5zpvH2upD3pypm/PJSfyQLl1aEUND6iFnM9MCacNiHVXCh7+++TlaR9cMwbVxV D+cnDsx+cuoYvPWBBeETxMQdJcPhd9rrqX2R8u9M6EDNQXaASxeKl0KfLQgwztZRg5f7 CnjJbyXLNLj0YsqU6DxjbYxzAtLOpB/eXrsbOnbLEujhqHVwvDM0ICDWCrXypLICQHMp bErm6IdGiC1JumOTbvgl9Ns/QehWn6651cjUcKaCrm1MClSw9JXQGSpy67sPDy1nshFj 8Peg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533xhiqveg19sMI3qtOGpINjN8Q8x6wD+/fzn+uXZ6Az0ibHWx5M xdNdMFhJAR/Ze2+MGoHM6qp5Pb/qKCYndZKxhW6TWp+r9w4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwvXjMKM00igZIuLQf4P6robSTBZFHDE5FBSfZLvWgMfngqrNZdgpU1BXmtrft5QggSGawToAFrwiZY+RA5nak= X-Received: by 2002:aca:a9c9:: with SMTP id s192mr14240325oie.163.1624023868850; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 06:44:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Alex Schoof Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 09:44:17 -0400 Message-ID: To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion , Erik Aronesty Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cf46e605c50a857e" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 14:17:00 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Boost Bitcoin circulation, Million Transactions Per Second with stronger privacy X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 13:44:31 -0000 --000000000000cf46e605c50a857e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A few questions/comments: Why is there a 10 sat fee on each tx? Where does that fee go? I don=E2=80=99t think this design sufficiently protects against double spen= ds by the =E2=80=9Cissuer=E2=80=9D (the person who actually has the UTXO). Your g= uarantee tx mechanism only really covers the case where someone tries to double spend part of a UTXO balance (in other words, if the penalty lost is less than the value gained by doing a double spend, its worth it to double spend, and in a world where you=E2=80=99re passing around digital IOUs, it=E2=80=99s e= asy to make it worth it). Later in the post, you mention that there will be a p2p network to gossip fund transfers and that will prevent an issuer from double spending. The problem there is that network latency is non-zero, large network partitions are both real and common, and nodes can come and go anytime (hardware failure, power failure, network partition healing, just because they feel like it, etc). Different nodes on the network might hear about different, conflicting transactions. Nodes will need a way to all come to consensus on what the right set of =E2=80=9Csent notes=E2=80=9D is.= I think you will end up reinventing a lot of the problems solved by bitcoin. Why did you pick email as the RPC mechanism to transfer these notes? Email is going to add variable amounts of latency and things like spam filters will cause issues. Alex On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 4:23 AM Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > for very small transactions, this seems to make a hell of a lot of sense. > > it's like lightning, but with no limits, no routing protocols... > everything is guaranteed by relative fees and the cost-of-theft. > > pretty cool. > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 4:14 PM raymo via bitcoin-dev > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > I have a proposal for improve Bitcoin TPS and privacy, here is the post= . > > > https://raymo-49157.medium.com/time-to-boost-bitcoin-circulation-million-= transactions-per-second-and-privacy-1eef8568d180 > > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D5344020.0 > > Can you please read it and share your idea about it. > > > > Cheers > > Raymo > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > --=20 Alex Schoof --000000000000cf46e605c50a857e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
A few questions/comments:

Why is there a 10 sat fee on each tx? Where does that f= ee go?=C2=A0

I don= =E2=80=99t think this design sufficiently protects against double spends by= the =E2=80=9Cissuer=E2=80=9D (the person who actually has the UTXO). Your = guarantee tx mechanism only really covers the case where someone tries to d= ouble spend part of a UTXO balance (in other words, if the penalty lost is = less than the value gained by doing a double spend, its worth it to double = spend, and in a world where you=E2=80=99re passing around digital IOUs, it= =E2=80=99s easy to make it worth it). Later in the post, you mention that t= here will be a p2p network to gossip fund transfers and that will prevent a= n issuer from double spending. The problem there is that network latency is= non-zero, large network partitions are both real and common, and nodes can= come and go anytime (hardware failure, power failure, network partition he= aling, just because they feel like it, etc). Different nodes on the network= might hear about different, conflicting transactions. Nodes will need a wa= y to all come to consensus on what the right set of =E2=80=9Csent notes=E2= =80=9D is. I think you will end up reinventing a lot of the problems solved= by bitcoin.=C2=A0

Why d= id you pick email as the RPC mechanism to transfer these notes? Email is go= ing to add variable amounts of latency and things like spam filters will ca= use issues.=C2=A0

Alex

On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 4:23 AM Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxf= oundation.org> wrote:
for ve= ry small transactions, this seems to make a hell of a lot of sense.

it's like lightning, but with no limits, no routing protocols...
everything is guaranteed by relative fees and the cost-of-theft.

pretty cool.

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 4:14 PM raymo via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I have a proposal for improve Bitcoin TPS and privacy, here is the pos= t.
> https://raymo-49157.medium.com/time-to-boost-bitc= oin-circulation-million-transactions-per-second-and-privacy-1eef8568d180
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D53= 44020.0
> Can you please read it and share your idea about it.
>
> Cheers
> Raymo
> _______________________________________________
> 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/mail= man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--


Alex Schoof
--000000000000cf46e605c50a857e--