path: root/80/ad29a8ae142cb8a3021799fc1bb786aa1538ce

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 C26D2C7C
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Mon, 22 Jan 2018 20:41:01 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wm0-f45.google.com (mail-wm0-f45.google.com [74.125.82.45])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63E342F6
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Mon, 22 Jan 2018 20:41:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wm0-f45.google.com with SMTP id f71so18748193wmf.0
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:41:00 -0800 (PST)
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; bh=dgC0Gt1lkBZT3+vJ02uEKcPjbvdaG9dZxeq81arflpc=;
	b=CfvTaitcA7qpszQjHRx9lM13tkMzIPsfhqJzQPvOQEHKMGvdE1GqSLNEAk/CRfT5FQ
	qvD5JEazxMW1WI2qKVczyPQ37J/zRqpw5nZ9UO1Zfa45+RP4DtcxMXMtLaQpBiCKk3OL
	JDAUcmIqx4DMKQD7o/S97CkIMpm/LNrZLVd2ML+8ksK4jJg0ydEr+ASHQU+tLk8+io8Z
	RIyjwD079GMQ9Q/MKILg58dUpDQ9EhstvBhlXA/h40CJsfJLNkTqr1pFrcqkTwSDCEYR
	/GYnajT+9jgHhIDqtDBhQUi0QwQyYlZKLkLnKn+4u7JvSqGZ/o7iSgmkgZyU+Lw/ZIyd
	8CJQ==
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;
	bh=dgC0Gt1lkBZT3+vJ02uEKcPjbvdaG9dZxeq81arflpc=;
	b=sKamjrHic+cvilOu4Dkfzkssa/P0YQTGeXKXWwCm4wLuZtwRn3ihwyZ9zScPU70rDj
	CdSwJJXwezgnPp2vRMAukb4wxXM+lqMixF+cWgeBpLCZKCknP7Ejgd6DqDdf/MYdGC7f
	H6cXI76H6WBuanKAA8FSEpYRu/CjzwlSjrAGCH1cPmWaThQ/zGAfDoxxXjYFAE3YMGby
	fYDUFvqXkyegLhWgQlqnCB3WnP8Vc3n5v/47nM6TrKpCR1nU9HJ5shgXS4z2BsFV7jLG
	EYlIATOI85RuotR2fWVQrzrooHAR0X6iWO5ESTR+nmE5IFa5DvliD9Yfh73UUi2GsQ2R
	UjHw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytdSYrkuVXOFuGvLHhgxKpvZpieYZUJMoCoBaTZCqibawMbZJsuJ
	/xXWxLS+Jhkl5hsiCJfE8jVtH/JZ7q8rXoEEWIKbR4I=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x225nPcd8qdqzsAxuf/StojOaKiRYZeMlvvv+g+dXlA4r9uGhWXY+haLibEYpFiIw0Yp/0fU+p2hGwG8TUkABhyk=
X-Received: by 10.28.183.8 with SMTP id h8mr53976wmf.72.1516653658871; Mon, 22
	Jan 2018 12:40:58 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: earonesty@gmail.com
Received: by 10.28.28.199 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:40:58 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CANZDnNo2HMWGOZ4torXvpqjbq6SE=NLBLwysJzetrpurWBu+yw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANZDnNomrpBTJU4=J1QqJpDePJ6RXyYsrwa=b9ZZOjyf1utQBw@mail.gmail.com>
	<ijnCMrLMjj4_aUv1BO5NiTk9jtMBL6aaN0yg4hwbF6JNms3MmlpNww0-smKeaqqT0dhsfmxlaX-tKoZ6s06g2ZNmgqY4uWnuuFul8e9on6g=@protonmail.com>
	<CANZDnNo2HMWGOZ4torXvpqjbq6SE=NLBLwysJzetrpurWBu+yw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 15:40:58 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: W048yuZZQh8lPywzxR7hqnQcaNc
Message-ID: <CAJowKgLJ2QmCGAwhUgW8foy-=8FK4FwzMxXYCNZoLaS=DXMCTg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chaofan Li <li3939108@gmail.com>, 
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1148f920959e8705636372bd"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 20:43:22 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Blockchain Voluntary Fork (Split) 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: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 20:41:01 -0000

--001a1148f920959e8705636372bd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Without enforcement liquidity will diverge.

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Chaofan Li via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Hi ZmnSCPxj
>
> I dont think they need to be ENFORCED to be worth the same.
> If the two chains=E2=80=99 algorithms are the same , except some identifi=
ers (eg.
> btc.0 btc.1=EF=BC=89, they have no reason to have different value. If so,=
 the
> market will adjust the value.
>
> Also, the total supply can be the same. The amount in blockchains  is jus=
t
> some numbers. The  wallet can display correct amount, according to the
> identifiers.
>
> The voluntary split is also backward compatible with old version
> transactions, they can be treated as tx for both chains and included in
> both chains later. For new version Tx after fork, some identifiers must b=
e
> added , to mark the tx is for that chain only. The miners need to choose
> one chain to mine.
>
> After several voluntary splits , the Blockchain basically become a
> blocktree, new blocks are added to the leaves(eg. btc.00 btc.01 btc.10
> btc.11 ), providing even more capacity.
>
> Chaofan
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 5:13 AM ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Good morning Chaofan Li,
>>
>> What enforces that bitcoin A is worth the same as bitcoin B?  Or are the=
y
>> allowed to eventually diverge in price?  If they diverge in price, how i=
s
>> that different from the current situation with Bitcoin, BCash, Bitcoin
>> Gold, Bitcoin Hardfork-of-the-week, and so on?
>>
>> Regards,
>> ZmnSCPxj
>>
>>
>> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com> Secure Email.
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> On January 17, 2018 3:55 PM, Chaofan Li via bitcoin-dev <
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Here I propose a simple method to solve the scalability issue of
>> blockchain.
>> It is more like a financial trick rather than a technical solution.
>>
>> The technical part is very simple:
>> Split ( hard fork ) the blockchain into two or more blockchains (e.g. tw=
o
>> blockchain A and B), voluntarily.
>> The two blockchains are the same except for some identifiers to
>> distinguish the two blockchains.
>> The coins on one blockchains cannot be sent to the other one or
>> interfered by the other blockchain (  considering so many hard forks in =
the
>> last year, the replay protection should work in this situation)
>> Everyone get double bitcoins. Each has half  value of original one
>> bitcoin.
>> Then, we have two almost same blockchains and the capacity of the
>> original blockchain is doubled theoretically.
>> When sending coin, the wallet should select one blockchain randomly and
>> try to send through only  one blockchain (If there is enough bitcoins)
>> I think it is a  possible solution, if the community realize  no
>> previously owned asset value  is lost.
>>
>> The method is inspired by the stock split
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_split>.
>> When a stock share is split, for example into two shares, the price
>> halves.
>> The market capitalization remains the same.
>> There is no dilution of every shareholders' total assets.
>>
>> The bitcoin often emphasizes that the total coin supply should not be
>> changed.
>> If the total supply increases, the value of a single coin will be dilute=
d.
>> That is true.
>> However, the bad part of inflation of fiat money is not  diluted value o=
f
>> every unit of fiat money caused by total supply increase.
>> The problem is the increased supply is not delivered to everyone
>> proportional to their previously owned money.
>> The increased supply is released through debt expansion.
>> The people that can borrow more money with low interest ratio (during QE=
,
>> it was nearly 0) can invest  and get profit.
>> Or they don't even need to pay back the debt. The debt is left to
>> government, which might never pay back the debt, and some  get more mone=
y
>> from government.
>> Others' money are diluted.
>>
>> With voluntary split of bitcoin, dilution of anyone's bitcoin assets
>> won't happen.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>

--001a1148f920959e8705636372bd
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Without enforcement liquidity will diverge.=C2=A0=C2=A0 <b=
r></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mon, J=
an 22, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Chaofan Li via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a=
 href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bi=
tcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote cl=
ass=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;p=
adding-left:1ex"><div><div dir=3D"auto">Hi ZmnSCPxj</div><div dir=3D"auto">=
<br></div><div dir=3D"auto">I dont think they need to be ENFORCED to be wor=
th the same.=C2=A0</div><div dir=3D"auto">If the two chains=E2=80=99 algori=
thms are the same , except some identifiers (eg. btc.0 btc.1=EF=BC=89, they=
 have no reason to have different value. If so, the market will adjust the =
value.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Also, the total s=
upply can be the same. The amount in blockchains =C2=A0is just some numbers=
. The =C2=A0wallet can display correct amount, according to the identifiers=
.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">The voluntary split is=
 also backward compatible with old version transactions, they can be treate=
d as tx for both chains and included in both chains later. For new version =
Tx after fork, some identifiers must be added , to mark the tx is for that =
chain only. The miners need to choose one chain to mine.</div><div dir=3D"a=
uto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">After several voluntary splits , the Block=
chain basically become a blocktree, new blocks are added to the leaves(eg. =
btc.00 btc.01 btc.10 btc.11 ), providing even more capacity.=C2=A0</div></d=
iv><div><span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><div><div dir=3D"aut=
o"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Chaofan</div></div></font></span><div><div c=
lass=3D"h5"><div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"=
><div>On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 5:13 AM ZmnSCPxj &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:ZmnSCP=
xj@protonmail.com" target=3D"_blank">ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:=
<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;bord=
er-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div>Good morning Chaofan Li,<br><=
/div><div><br></div><div>What enforces that bitcoin A is worth the same as =
bitcoin B?=C2=A0 Or are they allowed to eventually diverge in price?=C2=A0 =
If they diverge in price, how is that different from the current situation =
with Bitcoin, BCash, Bitcoin Gold, Bitcoin Hardfork-of-the-week, and so on?=
<br></div><div><br></div><div>Regards,<br></div><div>ZmnSCPxj<br></div><div=
><br></div><div class=3D"m_-5954414837857291361m_-6919424486659141598m_-134=
9810909568960831protonmail_signature_block"><div class=3D"m_-59544148378572=
91361m_-6919424486659141598m_-1349810909568960831protonmail_signature_block=
-user m_-5954414837857291361m_-6919424486659141598m_-1349810909568960831pro=
tonmail_signature_block-empty"><br></div><div class=3D"m_-59544148378572913=
61m_-6919424486659141598m_-1349810909568960831protonmail_signature_block-pr=
oton">Sent with <a href=3D"https://protonmail.com" target=3D"_blank">Proton=
Mail</a> Secure Email.<br></div></div><div><br></div><div>-------- Original=
 Message --------<br></div><div> On January 17, 2018 3:55 PM, Chaofan Li vi=
a bitcoin-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" =
target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:=
<br></div><div> <br></div><blockquote class=3D"m_-5954414837857291361m_-691=
9424486659141598m_-1349810909568960831protonmail_quote" type=3D"cite"><div>=
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Here I propose a simple method to solve =
the scalability issue of blockchain.<br></div><div>It is more like a financ=
ial trick rather than a technical solution.=C2=A0<br></div><div><br></div><=
div>The technical part is very simple:=C2=A0<br></div><div>Split ( hard for=
k ) the blockchain into two or more blockchains (e.g. two blockchain A and =
B), voluntarily.=C2=A0<br></div><div>The two blockchains are the same excep=
t for some identifiers to distinguish the two blockchains.<br></div><div>Th=
e coins on one blockchains cannot be sent to the other one or interfered by=
 the other blockchain (=C2=A0 considering so many hard forks in the last ye=
ar, the replay protection should work in this situation)<br></div><div>Ever=
yone get double bitcoins. Each has half=C2=A0 value of original one bitcoin=
.=C2=A0<br></div><div>Then, we have two almost same blockchains and the cap=
acity of the original blockchain is doubled theoretically.<br></div><div>Wh=
en sending coin, the wallet should select one blockchain randomly and try t=
o send through only=C2=A0 one blockchain (If there is enough bitcoins)<br><=
/div><div>I think it is a=C2=A0 possible solution, if the community realize=
=C2=A0 no previously owned asset value=C2=A0 is lost.<br></div><div><br></d=
iv><div>The method is inspired by the <a href=3D"https://en.wikipedia.org/w=
iki/Stock_split" target=3D"_blank">stock split</a>.<br></div><div>When a st=
ock share is split, for example into two shares, the price halves.<br></div=
><div>The market capitalization remains the same.<br></div><div>There is no=
 dilution of every shareholders&#39; total assets.<br></div><div><br></div>=
<div>The bitcoin often emphasizes that the total coin supply should not be =
changed.<br></div><div>If the total supply increases, the value of a single=
 coin will be diluted.<br></div><div>That is true.<br></div><div>However, t=
he bad part of inflation of fiat money is not=C2=A0 diluted value of every =
unit of fiat money caused by total supply increase.<br></div><div>The probl=
em is the increased supply is not delivered to everyone proportional to the=
ir previously owned money.<br></div><div>The increased supply is released t=
hrough debt expansion.<br></div><div>The people that can borrow more money =
with low interest ratio (during QE, it was nearly 0) can invest=C2=A0 and g=
et profit.<br></div><div>Or they don&#39;t even need to pay back the debt. =
The debt is left to government, which might never pay back the debt, and so=
me=C2=A0 get more money from government.<br></div><div>Others&#39; money ar=
e diluted.<br></div><div><br></div><div>With voluntary split of bitcoin, di=
lution of anyone&#39;s bitcoin assets won&#39;t happen.<br></div><div><br><=
/div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></bl=
ockquote><div><br></div></blockquote></div></div></div></div></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>

--001a1148f920959e8705636372bd--