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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1TfXyG-0006XE-2o
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 03 Dec 2012 15:30:12 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.214.175 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.175; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ob0-f175.google.com;
Received: from mail-ob0-f175.google.com ([209.85.214.175])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1TfXyA-0007Hr-Oc
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 03 Dec 2012 15:30:12 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f175.google.com with SMTP id vb8so2679977obc.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 03 Dec 2012 07:30:01 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.60.13.198 with SMTP id j6mr8445335oec.51.1354548601440; Mon,
03 Dec 2012 07:30:01 -0800 (PST)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.128.139 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 07:30:01 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <50BCC28A.4060503@gmail.com>
References: <80648682-E34A-455E-B34A-6BC24652C3EA@ceptacle.com>
<CAPg+sBi25xP8R03y1VR=q4ZJaeT6FAuV=hXsq_7niSHycpnPuA@mail.gmail.com>
<9CEDE4D4-3685-4F70-953E-15CC50A8AA3F@ceptacle.com>
<CAAS2fgTL=s-vvGsubUu9ZBMidd0wzZdVPb6rEUg+eTMaiipRbA@mail.gmail.com>
<50BCC28A.4060503@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 16:30:01 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: HOtxXD_wB-IiAEXJFPO0WSFPJA4
Message-ID: <CANEZrP1SfJ1oybLB7rUGERS7_MxQA4UtB1d0SOQ2mUi8-XwU=Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Alan Reiner <etotheipi@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1TfXyA-0007Hr-Oc
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Chain dust mitigation: Demurrage based
Chain Vacuuming
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: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 15:30:13 -0000
> Perhaps it could be improved by cleaning up dust from any address by default
> (not just ones already included in the tx), with the option for the user to
> disable that behavior. After all, anonymity was never a core feature of the
> network
It's cool that Armory already does this. I never had time to implement
good coin selection for bitcoinj :(
Just a couple of points: as this is primarily a side effect of
SatoshiDice, and a successful payment protocol will stop them doing
it, code put in place to do temporary cleanup now probably won't
seriously affect peoples privacy over the long term. Most people
aren't going to end up with lots of tiny outputs.
Second thing, it's best to carefully separate "anonymity" from
"privacy". Privacy is supposed to be a feature of the system (it says
so in Satoshis paper) because people demand it. If I loan a tenner to
my friend and he is able to find out what I earned last month, then
that trade was neither anonymous nor private. In this case I want
privacy but anonymity isn't useful. Mixing up anonymity with privacy
is not only a public relations problem, but can lead to confusion from
users when they, eg, try and buy Bitcoins from an exchange and are
asked to provide ID proofs.
|
