Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52742305 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 18:29:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-oi0-f52.google.com (mail-oi0-f52.google.com [209.85.218.52]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD8B21AF for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 18:29:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by oiak8 with SMTP id k8so32870992oia.1 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:29:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=SqYAmw3CA5+7rEsA4ttu1v33lJ7pvqq4nirSVEoFGrY=; b=ptXOfLtnikHiu4vDhm+byNeZ/nev02iZvzw5jHYpCiRtMpbBXxYlaa59sMyeThsNrf Nc1QnN5NxTz0hVC14HRDPFpc0IUHkM5mIFEKnV/KTkFbxjSK/wpWGuEYsvR8sURKj9Dx 6hYNCRuvtSrb9Vfd9N0CVbZwAkHmU9NEyr3CCODl1wdretsvXL9QTLJQlMgbURUQyTDJ J9r8UyQ+mK3CwW2Xry02OhABBSjs7a3K7nWxRwANc5YyrqzPdsF8TTvfFj73zw5tXFBH G7AIohAU+JwMdDBqWwQiixWllKomPr7qjBJyOnd5LaRr9owK7HnPlUWZ5r8MqiaMZYnV +LLQ== X-Received: by 10.202.81.210 with SMTP id f201mr2378057oib.116.1444847351086; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:29:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: stanga@gmail.com Received: by 10.182.104.164 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:28:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Ittay Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 14:28:51 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: -Q7i68AmpyMrJbsh7_WpUDoF6I8 Message-ID: To: Bryan Bishop Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113b10681dc599052214bdaa X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev , Ittay Eyal Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin-NG whitepaper. X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 18:29:12 -0000 --001a113b10681dc599052214bdaa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Emin G=C3=BCn Sirer > wrote: > > while the whitepaper has all the nitty gritty details: > > http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.02037 > > Taking reward compensation back by fraud proofs is not enough to fix > the problems associated with double spending (such as, everyone has to > wait for the "real" confirmations instead of the "possibly > double-spend" confirmations). Some of this was discussed in -wizards > recently: > http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-wizards/2015-09-19.log Fraud proof removes all the attacker's revenue. It's like the attacker sacrifices an entire block for double spending in the current system. I think Luke-Jr got it right at that discussion. Best, Ittay --001a113b10681dc599052214bdaa Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Bryan Bishop <kanzure@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Oct= 14, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Emin G=C3=BCn Sirer
<bitcoin-dev@li= sts.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> while the whitepaper has all the nitty gritty details:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.02037

Taking reward compensation back by fraud proofs is not enough to fix=
the problems associated with double spending (such as, everyone has to
wait for the "real" confirmations instead of the "possibly double-spend" confirmations). Some of this was discussed in -wizards recently:
http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-wizards/2015-09-19.log=

Fraud proof removes all the attacker's= revenue. It's like the attacker sacrifices an entire block for double = spending in the current system. I think Luke-Jr got it right at that discus= sion.=C2=A0

Best,=C2=A0
Ittay=C2=A0

--001a113b10681dc599052214bdaa--