1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pete@petertodd.org>) id 1UnZYk-00062f-MX
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 14 Jun 2013 19:21:18 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
designates 62.13.149.82 as permitted sender)
client-ip=62.13.149.82; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
helo=outmail149082.authsmtp.co.uk;
Received: from outmail149082.authsmtp.co.uk ([62.13.149.82])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1UnZYf-0002JK-DC for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 14 Jun 2013 19:21:18 +0000
Received: from mail-c232.authsmtp.com (mail-c232.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.232])
by punt14.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id r5EJL317053587;
Fri, 14 Jun 2013 19:21:03 GMT
Received: from petertodd.org (petertodd.org [174.129.28.249])
(authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id r5EJKw3x043867
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Fri, 14 Jun 2013 20:21:00 +0100 (BST)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 15:20:58 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
Message-ID: <20130614192058.GA11509@petertodd.org>
References: <20130519132359.GA12366@netbook.cypherspace.org>
<20130613133932.GA13028@netbook.cypherspace.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="azLHFNyN32YCQGCU"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130613133932.GA13028@netbook.cypherspace.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: 8c6f21f3-d527-11e2-b10b-0025903375e2
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aAdMdwYUEkAaAgsB AmUbWVReUlx7WWI7 ag1VcwRfa1RMVxto
VEFWR1pVCwQmQxl0 fGVZUVFycwZOfnk+ YE5gXj5TD0Isd0cr
QVMAEG8BeGZhPWIC AkFYJR5UcAFPdx9G aVd6AXFDAzANdhES
HhM4ODE3eDlSNilR RRkIIFQOdA4KBXYg Rx0YEH0mVVIMVm0v
KFQqLRYWHVoaNUQ0 dEA9UF0ZNRBFYgAA
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1019:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 174.129.28.249/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
X-Headers-End: 1UnZYf-0002JK-DC
Cc: Bitcoin-Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] is there a way to do bitcoin-staging?
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 19:21:18 -0000
--azLHFNyN32YCQGCU
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 03:39:32PM +0200, Adam Back wrote:
> I had one thought towards this which is a different kind of merged mining.
>=20
> I think a "fair" merged mining aiming for price parity would be done by t=
he
> miner having to choose the altcoin or btc at mine time, and altcoin chain
> considering btc mine unspendable and bitcoin considering ac unspendable.
One way to look at what you are describing is to say you want to prove
your sacrifice of potential BTC earnings. That goes back to the PoW
hashcash stuff I mentioned earlier, and is accomplished by simply mining
shares with an unspendable coinbase to prove you did work that could
have resulted in Bitcoins, but didn't.
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
00000000000000b7dc90d34b08218b76687c0cd8a00878fea13d4ce98b0f4df0
--azLHFNyN32YCQGCU
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAlG7bRkACgkQpEFN739thowEbQCfbwXIEzFD6X7OdOoU7d/vzIHd
KFUAn12CRaHJY1MBNcnt3tclDyj5dqAy
=M8ph
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--azLHFNyN32YCQGCU--
|
