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
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
|
Return-Path: <earonesty@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE881B4B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 22 Aug 2017 14:29:28 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wr0-f194.google.com (mail-wr0-f194.google.com
[209.85.128.194])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B8E9460
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 22 Aug 2017 14:29:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wr0-f194.google.com with SMTP id a47so2446029wra.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 22 Aug 2017 07:29:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id
:subject:to:cc;
bh=t1w+Phxas8gTyhenJXhs999/BU03LkmFUkuGT2KKuQA=;
b=i1IulTXnjk/WBWR31gr8T++5J3JBwUrxaqWkcTd/9dMP1nIuJtwKQJ1dyB3VSsZxk3
r7UI7zzkWg34QxHLH6wtPCnlRE9GTzP594yvbwqr5oWoytsL3rUkKH9CQv/BIx80jcdi
T1YUi5WnqKiiwo686YjgX0Hmy2sg6xFz8ynxkuHtB0rBUnmuq7nFUHacgvJWiqjAwGkV
JgJdQz3Vu0hFludQfw/KnJNOv4pymoE8B4HrD1K3h1zKIpCNSewKxWA3NFQZkfF/KgM3
eVMiJIq6RBdaPvzPdFpDgtekNNvoKKQMy4djjbEH61c/NwyqpPyNKXTxp+HSOJXAROR0
PGuA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from
:date:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=t1w+Phxas8gTyhenJXhs999/BU03LkmFUkuGT2KKuQA=;
b=blnaQi0njUoU33qbDLtbUHsO75l5IEffD8Mje2BEN1Uc3j1FVKmPJ7/+odCOq0/Klr
EkzDuAJn/8gqNcAxE3bJu9LsjnrWJ8ti+jB7uD4VzhCkZalzYf3Nn+2ypdvq2aJX7J2j
Z1SrPZlz3YUBKwRRjNeuRtEAPrijBhwu/vvcs9LksKqLkDD4oXLT0e1O78pmlUx0mijE
1cccstD1sfOkaJK8nUeOMYysZgU+aLKS2oxOLNPFKyYiiN0gNWzIA9r8DmfrnUYSYaVM
yEMSFEtE8rLrRB+R4co/EAWMSJ6wHqZnionBozdV4IMEjvr/G+43B/TBTMgUfOepeHNZ
ROUg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5g57h7NWTqFFeSsCGktelNxosX1TCOZouPJD6NxpeQdlTXVoQ9q
lD5XoClvpQd8MRAvCgcw0i5gQfL2IiLd
X-Received: by 10.28.64.197 with SMTP id n188mr531534wma.135.1503412167029;
Tue, 22 Aug 2017 07:29:27 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: earonesty@gmail.com
Received: by 10.28.225.135 with HTTP; Tue, 22 Aug 2017 07:29:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAL5BAw2GoQb3-R1Ybe581MbOQvx8wvT0bLoEQ29caNVJTFShmA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALKSEdq0CUKPY2u+WfAaWtg5nXYKCJzRnDbU2iMs8PQQSpPDGA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAL5BAw2GoQb3-R1Ybe581MbOQvx8wvT0bLoEQ29caNVJTFShmA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2017 10:29:26 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: j6v51s3HU7jnrmV9-hQGBFTbm7k
Message-ID: <CAJowKgJhN=Se=kqrFR_B4zJQGf3iBpM6hU+xeUN9eANsmVuwXQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chris Riley <criley@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114b2e022abaad0557586c71"
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 22 Aug 2017 14:32:30 +0000
Cc: Matthew Beton <matthew.beton@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] UTXO growth scaling solution proposal
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, 22 Aug 2017 14:29:28 -0000
--001a114b2e022abaad0557586c71
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
I agree, it is only a good idea in the event of a quantum computing threat
to the security of Bitcoin.
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Chris Riley via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> This seems to be drifting off into alt-coin discussion. The idea that we
> can change the rules and steal coins at a later date because they are
> "stale" or someone is "hoarding" is antithetical to one of the points of
> bitcoin in that you can no longer control your own money ("be your own
> bank") because someone can at a later date take your coins for some reason
> that is outside your control and solely based on some rationalization by a
> third party. Once the rule is established that there are valid reasons why
> someone should not have control of their own bitcoins, what other reasons
> will then be determined to be valid?
>
> I can imagine Hal Finney being revived (he was cryo-preserved at Alcor if
> you aren't aware) after 100 or 200 years expecting his coins to be there
> only to find out that his coins were deemed "stale" so were "reclaimed" (in
> the current doublespeak - e.g. stolen or confiscated). Or perhaps he
> locked some for his children and they are found to be "stale" before they
> are available. He said in March 2013, "I think they're safe enough" stored
> in a paper wallet. Perhaps any remaining coins are no longer "safe enough."
>
> Again, this seems (a) more about an alt-coin/bitcoin fork or (b) better in
> bitcoin-discuss at best vs bitcoin-dev. I've seen it discussed many times
> since 2010 and still do not agree with the rational that embracing allowing
> someone to steal someone else's coins for any reason is a useful change to
> bitcoin.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 4:19 AM, Matthew Beton via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> Okay so I quite like this idea. If we start removing at height 630000 or
>> 840000 (gives us 4-8 years to develop this solution), it stays nice and
>> neat with the halving interval. We can look at this like so:
>>
>> B - the current block number
>> P - how many blocks behind current the coin burning block is. (630000,
>> 840000, or otherwise.)
>>
>> Every time we mine a new block, we go to block (B-P), and check for stale
>> coins. These coins get burnt up and pooled into block B's miner fees. This
>> keeps the mining rewards up in the long term, people are less likely to
>> stop mining due to too low fees. It also encourages people to keep moving
>> their money around the enconomy instead of just hording and leaving it.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
--001a114b2e022abaad0557586c71
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">I agree, it is only a good idea in the event of a quantum =
computing threat to the security of Bitcoin.=C2=A0=C2=A0 <br></div><div cla=
ss=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9=
:45 AM, Chris Riley via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto=
:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists=
.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_qu=
ote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex=
"><div dir=3D"ltr">This seems to be drifting off into alt-coin discussion.=
=C2=A0 The idea that we can change the rules and steal coins at a later dat=
e because they are "stale" or someone is "hoarding" is=
=C2=A0antithetical to one of the points of bitcoin in that you can no longe=
r control your own money ("be your own bank") because someone can=
at a later date take your coins for some reason that is outside your contr=
ol and solely based on some rationalization by a third party.=C2=A0 Once th=
e rule is established that there are valid reasons why someone should not h=
ave control of their own bitcoins, what other reasons will then be determin=
ed to be valid?<div><br></div><div>I can imagine Hal Finney being revived (=
he was cryo-preserved at Alcor if you aren't aware) after 100 or 200 ye=
ars expecting his coins to be there only to find out that his coins were de=
emed "stale" so were "reclaimed" (in the current double=
speak - e.g. stolen or confiscated).=C2=A0 Or perhaps he locked some for hi=
s children and they are found to be "stale" before they are avail=
able.=C2=A0 He said in March 2013, "I think they're safe enough&qu=
ot; stored in a paper wallet.=C2=A0 Perhaps any remaining coins are no long=
er "safe enough."<br><div><br></div><div>Again, this seems (a) mo=
re about an alt-coin/bitcoin fork or (b) better in bitcoin-discuss at best =
vs bitcoin-dev. I've seen it discussed many times since 2010 and still =
do not agree with the rational that embracing allowing someone to steal som=
eone else's coins for any reason is a useful change to bitcoin.</div><d=
iv><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div><div class=3D"gmail_=
extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div><div class=3D"h5">On Tue, Aug 22=
, 2017 at 4:19 AM, Matthew Beton via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a h=
ref=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitc=
oin-dev@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br></div></div=
><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1=
px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div class=3D"h5"><span>Okay so I quit=
e like this idea. If we start removing at height 630000 or 840000 (gives us=
4-8 years to develop this solution), it stays nice and neat with the halvi=
ng interval. We can look at this like so:</span><br><br><span>B - the curre=
nt block number</span><br><span>P - how many blocks behind current the coin=
burning block is. (630000, 840000, or otherwise.)</span><br><br><span>Ever=
y time we mine a new block, we go to block (B-P), and check for stale coins=
. These coins get burnt up and pooled into block B's miner fees. This k=
eeps the mining rewards up in the long term, people are less likely to stop=
mining due to too low fees. It also encourages people to keep moving their=
money around the enconomy instead of just hording and leaving it.</span>
<br></div></div><span class=3D"">______________________________<wbr>_______=
__________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundat<wbr>ion.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-d<wbr>ev</a><br>
<br></span></blockquote></div><br></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
--001a114b2e022abaad0557586c71--
|
