1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
|
Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E135C002D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 4 May 2022 02:37:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 462094026C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 4 May 2022 02:37:19 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id zDjvvz_o80rz
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 4 May 2022 02:37:18 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-40138.protonmail.ch (mail-40138.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.138])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEF5D40264
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 4 May 2022 02:37:17 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 04 May 2022 02:37:10 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail2; t=1651631834;
bh=vdzCfaiaUEc6jsO9Ri+D8fk1q5LfawYAUX9ka65kYSY=;
h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:
References:Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:
Feedback-ID:Message-ID;
b=X+jgNHWTiaYPwvBpRUrPoSlOFPxhvUxHhhoudzcq64TcFl6wK+5FSNBlMZYQrTRGG
xgHkPtUTZjyZmClbdRlTzysOb9u8VV/FoPDTqFhQ0FECjAdphFQUNft5jcSoW4CRdc
3EgZvABlZVAkmaXTcPynKlnxj+qMItUS/Thv++lAyT22avKukA8QzrjwHBJYx2b9Fx
CyoBfAA6Jjnd7XhUtBEMG+BQAcgzIAHVo74TNXxABXuPH3IYjXWDJx3YUn/013p/rn
w6op0RZDndHjuvgGrUrQ24yLAQPNkU9ajatAgB2vAHXxJzGjfuWxThP4BpdbC8GI3O
9HfkZVvzTu52w==
To: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <ipHZZpEipF7oliIh-RlPP2e6rcWkIFW22jEOwaCPIfJUuoDh4JfmzvGC2i7tZK-kT0o0osyxFyWxZKDRZOWI_dqdSWNWOLR7KpN3CsN6BRE=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <48D4B621-D862-4031-AE43-3F54D34FB0B5@voskuil.org>
References: <f3892570-6c45-47ee-2804-9988ff18bdf5@riseup.net>
<48D4B621-D862-4031-AE43-3F54D34FB0B5@voskuil.org>
Feedback-ID: 2872618:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Timelocked address fidelity bond
for BIP39 seeds
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 04 May 2022 02:37:19 -0000
Good morning e,
> It looks like you are talking about lending where the principal return is=
guaranteed by covenant at maturity. This make the net present value of the=
loan zero.
I am talking about lending where:
* Lessor pays landlord X satoshis in rent.
* Landlord provides use of the fidelity bond coin (value Y) for N blocks.
* Landlord gets the entire fidelity bond amount (Y) back.
Thus, the landlord gets X + Y satoshis, earning X satoshis, at the cost of =
having Y satoshis locked for N blocks.
So I do not understand why the value of this, to the landlord, would be 0.
Compare to a simple HODL strategy, where I lock Y satoshis for N blocks and=
get Y satoshi back.
Or are you saying that a simple HODL strategy is of negative value and that=
"zero value" is the point where you actively invest all your savings?
Or are you saying that HODL strategy is of some value since it still allows=
you to spend funds freely in the N blocks you are HODLing them, and the op=
tion to spend is of value, while dedfinitely locking the value Y for N bloc=
ks is equal to the value X of the rent paid (and thus net zero value)?
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
