Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Yr9kj-0004hS-6T for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 09 May 2015 18:45:33 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org designates 62.13.148.113 as permitted sender) client-ip=62.13.148.113; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org; helo=outmail148113.authsmtp.com; Received: from outmail148113.authsmtp.com ([62.13.148.113]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1Yr9kh-0002RV-16 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 09 May 2015 18:45:33 +0000 Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235]) by punt17.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t49IjOia060982; Sat, 9 May 2015 19:45:24 +0100 (BST) Received: from muck ([209.141.138.18]) (authenticated bits=128) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t49IjJaa007289 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 9 May 2015 19:45:22 +0100 (BST) Date: Sat, 9 May 2015 14:45:18 -0400 From: Peter Todd To: Jim Phillips Message-ID: <20150509184518.GA19703@muck> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Server-Quench: 8c934804-f67b-11e4-b396-002590a15da7 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aAdMdgsUFVQNAgsB AmMbWl1eVFh7W2E7 aQpYcwRZY1RPXA10 UUBWR1pVCwQmRRgI f0RkA0hydwJEcHc+ bEJrVj5TD015cU59 RlMCE2pUeGZhPWQC AkNRcR5UcAFPdx8U a1UrBXRDAzANdhES HhM4ODE3eDlSNilR RRkIIFQOdA4iViUh SB8PBikuGktNSSIp ZwYrJkMXHUAeelky PBM6WEAVexgcQhFe EiMFPRNpABENTjYi BwpBUCYA X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 209.141.138.18/587 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: 1Yr9kh-0002RV-16 Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] A suggestion for reducing the size of the UTXO database X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 May 2015 18:45:33 -0000 --8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, May 09, 2015 at 12:09:32PM -0500, Jim Phillips wrote: > The vast majority of users are running one of a handful of different wall= et > apps: Core, Electrum; Armory; Mycelium; Breadwallet; Coinbase; Circle; > Blockchain.info; and maybe a few others. The developers of all these > wallets have a vested interest in the continued usefulness of Bitcoin, and > so should not be opposed to changing their UTXO selection algorithms to o= ne > that reduces the UTXO database instead of growing it. You can't assume that UTXO growth will be driven by walles at all; the UTXO set's global consensus functionality is incredibly useful and will certainly be used by all manner of applications, many having nothing to do with Bitcoin. As one of many examples, here's a proposal - with working code - to use the UTXO set to get consensus over TLC certificate revocations. The author, Christopher Allen, was one of the co-authors of the SSL standard: https://github.com/ChristopherA/revocable-self-signed-tls-certificates-hack There's nothing we can do to stop these kinds of usages other than forcing users to identify themselves to get permission to use the Bitcoin blockchain. Using the Bitcoin blockchain gives their users significantly better security in many cases than any alternatives, so there's strong incentives to do so. Finally, the cost many of these alternative uses are willing to pay pre UTXO/transaction is significantly higher than the fees many existing Bitcoin users can pay to make transactions. --=20 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 00000000000000000e7980aab9c096c46e7f34c43a661c5cb2ea71525ebb8af7 --8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGrBAEBCACVBQJVTlW7XhSAAAAAABUAQGJsb2NraGFzaEBiaXRjb2luLm9yZzAw MDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwZTc5ODBhYWI5YzA5NmM0NmU3ZjM0YzQzYTY2MWM1Y2Iy ZWE3MTUyNWViYjhhZjcvFIAAAAAAFQARcGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3JncGV0 ZUBwZXRlcnRvZC5vcmcACgkQwIXyHOf0udzWeQf/VOHRI/jfoW/NSbjKZvtmYQ6C +sHAKplRN8Fr3l4kIms+MGPjRw0/CH/fl/CCcmN0VLhFVw1wVc2eugFfSpD7g4Vq uNZGdALKt/wnrKtb2nktcd+Rq0zEwxztzBbPrfcFqDAkT9VI6FQJ0usKf6j8owKN TQUBVeFMW+kLA6v5AvOfzo0Wj9asMJ2XE0+87A/5N6gDmyFuJ2fR5boHO+Wo8QaY tehyMOqQL6yAEluL98OzzIBExRauFzztqTd8Nn43ViaB7oo+dm88t3bTRgGWTYoV u9Xn/NtI60aWSpZG0ylcWZ3/EK7nym6AJE/PBM8gHjQeV+fV4p1VU3Svb0cN5A== =cF6s -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+--