Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2019 04:57:03 +0000
To: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>,
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <SEQmsx6ck79biVthBbBk1b9r9-R45sBwqWrv3FewQIBl4J18sOlwAPRt8sbTIbrBB8DX538GfwQkU40lyODmEkGSwah_VmbXT8iOr2Jcjlw=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <6B9A04E2-8EEE-40A0-8B39-64AA0F478CAB@voskuil.org>
References: <0DBC0DEA-C999-4AEE-B2E1-D5337ECD9405@gmail.com>
	<BF027CD0-FE29-4DD1-AB96-DE92B597AD18@gmail.com>
	<3F46CDD5-DA80-49C8-A51F-8066680EF347@voskuil.org>
	<A4A6099F-F115-4CBF-B7D5-F16581476126@gmail.com>
	<063D7C06-F5D8-425B-80CE-CAE03A1AAD0C@voskuil.org>
	<0AA10217-E1CC-46D1-9B43-038CEEF942CD@gmail.com>
	<E72C4A8E-F850-400B-B19B-7D06B8A169EC@voskuil.org>
	<A64C3DCB-10CE-45EA-9A1B-7E3D13DF90EA@gmail.com>
	<6B9A04E2-8EEE-40A0-8B39-64AA0F478CAB@voskuil.org>
Feedback-ID: el4j0RWPRERue64lIQeq9Y2FP-mdB86tFqjmrJyEPR9VAtMovPEo9tvgA0CrTsSHJeeyPXqnoAu6DN-R04uJUg==:Ext:ProtonMail
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Generalized covenants with taproot enable
	riskless or risky lending,
	prevent credit inflation through fractional reserve
Precedence: list

Good morning Eric,


> > and thanks to you and ZmnSCPxj we now have two additional uses cases fo=
r UTXOs that are only temporarily accessible to their current owner.
>
> Actually you have a single potentially-valid use case, the one I have pre=
sented. The others I have shown to be invalid (apart from scamming) and no =
additional information to demonstrate errors in my conclusions have been of=
fered.

I presented another use case, that of the "Bitcoin Classified Ads Network".
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2019-July/017083.ht=
ml

Advertisements are "backed" by an unspent TXO.
In order to limit their local resource consumption, nodes of this network w=
ill preferentially keep advertisements that are backed by higher UTXO value=
s divided by advertisement size, and drop those with too low UTXO value div=
ided by advertisement size.

Thus, spammers will either need to rent larger UTXO values for their spam, =
paying for the higher rent involved, or fall back to pre-Bitcoin spamming m=
ethods.
Thus I think I have presented a use-case that is viable for this and does n=
ot simply devolve to "just burn a 1-satoshi output".

I still do not quite support generalized covenants as the use-case is alrea=
dy possible on current Bitcoin (and given that with just a little more tran=
saction introspection this enables Turing-completeness), but the basic conc=
ept of "renting a UTXO of substantial value" appears sound to me.


Regards,
ZmnSCPxj