Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UcBU3-00087k-89 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 14 May 2013 09:25:23 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.215.175 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.175; envelope-from=adam.back@gmail.com; helo=mail-ea0-f175.google.com; Received: from mail-ea0-f175.google.com ([209.85.215.175]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1UcBU2-0004N3-6A for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 14 May 2013 09:25:23 +0000 Received: by mail-ea0-f175.google.com with SMTP id h10so46877eaj.20 for ; Tue, 14 May 2013 02:25:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent:x-hashcash:x-hashcash:x-hashcash:x-hashcash; bh=TYPDb/n410Ak2rhstvZ2MM6XF0eY7SWXcyPbIl8IWZk=; b=ZeZa42kpPoTUjEZM245uI+YP7zyF6dW/qgFXyR7Ajt2r1JYc/PkHXThF3AM6kaFaid MzNOdj3M872AFui+1mFjMtO6BO2kC24ZJLX+dzaxljXLLbOb8QKOq3PMDVf8bqRL3uTH Kt3YMvd1l8wVV941oxrsoXt8uM1sCPaQCKO3M0svnRi2vk1uu/RC6RwaQguyiYLo0+hl cak2opR03L9SVit7z2Ktm7afzHgdDYgXxgKkWPJ2tJu+cEn+5QoWQmohFuvKpk8uOhVO snk5Yzgbz9bqgo4zEl8SIIPqdY2FDfOls0AwGT/B/8aYnxNjYmZUGXjyTVl8m5QiUCdP iZWw== X-Received: by 10.14.179.133 with SMTP id h5mr89276671eem.34.1368523515782; Tue, 14 May 2013 02:25:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netbook (c83-90.i07-21.onvol.net. [92.251.83.90]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id bj12sm28182185eeb.8.2013.05.14.02.25.14 for (version=TLSv1.1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 14 May 2013 02:25:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by netbook (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DBE262E05AB; Tue, 14 May 2013 11:25:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: by flare (hashcash-sendmail, from uid 1000); Tue, 14 May 2013 11:25:08 +0200 Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 11:25:07 +0200 From: Adam Back To: Jeff Garzik Message-ID: <20130514092507.GA21160@netbook.cypherspace.org> References: <20130511045342.GA28588@petertodd.org> <20130511102209.GA27823@netbook.cypherspace.org> <20130513105408.GB3393@netbook.cypherspace.org> <20130513211244.GA9550@netbook.cypherspace.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Hashcash: 1:20:130514:jgarzik@exmulti.com::TKPtOmICzcVUB8pJ:000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000009GnC X-Hashcash: 1:20:130514:john.dillon892@googlemail.com::IDFO6hyaxpJ60dQJ:00000000 0000000000000000000000004ieB X-Hashcash: 1:20:130514:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net::P+4WZgW0+WTr3 Wzi:000000000000000000008bXr X-Hashcash: 1:20:130514:adam@cypherspace.org::h7nm4X3l/YZ72z/l:00000000000000000 0000000000000000000000004HpO 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 (adam.back[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Headers-End: 1UcBU2-0004N3-6A Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] merged mining hashcash & bitcoin (Re: Coinbase TxOut Hashcash) 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: Tue, 14 May 2013 09:25:23 -0000 On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:00:27PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: >When a transaction's input value exceeds its output value, the >remainder is the transaction fee. The miner's reward for processing >transactions is the 25 BTC initial currency distribution + the sum of >all per-transaction fees. A destroy-by-miner fee transaction is a >normal bitcoin transaction sent by any user, that might look like > >Input 1: 1.0 BTC >Output 1: 0.5 BTC > >(the miner fee is implicitly 0.5 BTC, paid to whomever mines the >transaction into a block) > >Sadly the bitcoin protocol prevents zero-output, >give-it-all-to-the-miner transactions. Well if it is a later transaction, not an integral part of the reward transaction (that is definitionally mined by being serialized into the coinbase), the user may elect to withhold the promised transaction give-to-miner, so thats not so good. Or do you mean to say you could have (implicit reward 25BTC) and reward transaction .001 BTC to self and 24.999 BTC with existing bitcoin format and validation semantics? That would be close enough to give-to-miner. Also the output sum > 0BTC limitation could be changed to >= maybe... (just one well placed character :) Adam