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
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
|
Return-Path: <greg_not_so@hotmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 392278A1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 26 Mar 2017 12:11:49 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from COL004-OMC2S13.hotmail.com (col004-omc2s13.hotmail.com
[65.55.34.87])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 946D61CD
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 26 Mar 2017 12:11:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from NAM02-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([65.55.34.71])
by COL004-OMC2S13.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with
Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.23008); Sun, 26 Mar 2017 05:11:46 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hotmail.com;
s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version;
bh=uv+9oUvJD2EiNpV59XUCdDCjHQQnaEKdCiKU1BJgyAk=;
b=SkSZgfwjcvpQl171SSxC7XtGoQXGG0h+P1lxPm0ZpsfzPmAnpnmOk6LYLszb+WGBkMPjUPmTN77wNDtRiFSMujmt3A4f1H9VlEK4xptV1ZfoY2//QkcUSTNucJqhyebAtodDkYi2belQvSXugbntAorSnP1iAs7CWq69EaERwPoT463DI5Ots22D/s3JFAIFR5WRa3QoTO0luaf87+iH1gPnP+t730oJwTCqvuCNmQlYRuWA4Nkp0FBb5qUe52u8F8p5F4RoUexzQZ3PPzGDtUKX6f63gIzUX0Mlg2HybMyTSl7vt/vbRSUzjGxOvGHh457BQPR0CUJY03+JDvvZCw==
Received: from SN1NAM02FT059.eop-nam02.prod.protection.outlook.com
(10.152.72.57) by SN1NAM02HT063.eop-nam02.prod.protection.outlook.com
(10.152.72.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.977.7;
Sun, 26 Mar 2017 12:11:44 +0000
Received: from BLUPR15MB0051.namprd15.prod.outlook.com (10.152.72.57) by
SN1NAM02FT059.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.72.177) with
Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id
15.1.977.7 via Frontend Transport; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 12:11:44 +0000
Received: from BLUPR15MB0051.namprd15.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.124.25]) by
BLUPR15MB0051.namprd15.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.124.25]) with mapi id
15.01.0991.020; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 12:11:44 +0000
From: greg misiorek <greg_not_so@hotmail.com>
To: Martin Stolze <martin@stolze.cc>, Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Thread-Topic: [bitcoin-dev] Inquiry: Transaction Tiering
Thread-Index: AQHSozSRUWiCc54Lc0mOEW/56Z4F9qGk/gIAgADSewCAATxb/g==
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 12:11:44 +0000
Message-ID: <BLUPR15MB00516290185A5FC6B82F0D08B1300@BLUPR15MB0051.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAOyfL0r8dLR=7Co5+YzbPQUeTs6Lw+OQjZTy=iyoDmr6VV_Qpw@mail.gmail.com>
<Rs51ijp6P21vJsv7OxVB-k8vuJC_aUd8KnpxHC3phNw_lPieY2lS-k95gytpHTNzzBfuX030RRFKzrrwS3pfjTuFea_eUfErb3qDp5LDHp4=@protonmail.com>,
<CAOyfL0qW=8091BAo9R2mskbyFSS3hOnXd+Wjsu4LQy7EtqzJjg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOyfL0qW=8091BAo9R2mskbyFSS3hOnXd+Wjsu4LQy7EtqzJjg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: stolze.cc; dkim=none (message not signed)
header.d=none; stolze.cc; dmarc=none action=none header.from=hotmail.com;
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:092F553BF9607627CDCD827FA27CFEEBB5FC99B9C5752BDA49CA012CC7B45679;
UpperCasedChecksum:EE28C42928C25ACE9F53A3462F0A40567D46EEC7066B1649C78F90EB4C940685;
SizeAsReceived:8376; Count:42
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-tmn: [zKgLu4/QG/e2S3AxmpBzhkagtMMbcjZV]
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SN1NAM02HT063;
5:vpLxEFCrwF4dA1J2nc5W/21nQny0b2oPIs4X4D3QJCdAqeD9oVFUZwf1LZuyDBOVejEKG5qelvQtu6dBffxn7wSOMgAAvjD7HUbMmEyTf59wgGzw3p/7ePkPLevQvyQn9NmMu/gnwLbb2RnTHcnVkw==;
24:FmviUf6ouqaOZJrj44ea/FHVcfn3fKgtM6wSEJwYOKtJZ0MwcYHCs5OvvQgtt+7PokckmAGJ96/DMDwOzVcWxKW0YMBsKd9UtMC2TDZuS5w=;
7:wTMXzeBjiLyOvgr59nvcmuVQrm3lWoBIwlwH/WECEvX2vI4qJZLaWvDgz36qJyO/enI4Ql+RiPvjqjJ9mvjegaxbQXvIDXN5uyFePfWWAdlHtr9rpwemNMKYzG0rwGHP45CBbwhFrNKAMQdRgDMp9+ZqodfWn3C8048VU8BSFD1wOfoJmLzA+Rbz0abZKErzSjx8q3M81+xsx5lY9RN3ZyGP59utw+A7gg5oqRADP0yUG494XnUNOIIIhl4i33mPlxol8GTyOhKIm0inhrvTnL3HawoKGIv5jvzX3Fc/oKcDGG2KaPFictrHjYfxTYJv
x-incomingheadercount: 42
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-forefront-antispam-report: EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(98901004);
DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:SN1NAM02HT063;
H:BLUPR15MB0051.namprd15.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None;
LANG:en;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: e500b8d1-bbd0-44db-df5f-08d474414509
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0;
RULEID:(22001)(201702061074)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(2017031320274)(2017031322274)(1603101448)(1601125374)(1701031045);
SRVR:SN1NAM02HT063;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0;
RULEID:(432015281)(444000031); SRVR:SN1NAM02HT063; BCL:0; PCL:0;
RULEID:; SRVR:SN1NAM02HT063;
x-forefront-prvs: 0258E7CCD4
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_000_BLUPR15MB00516290185A5FC6B82F0D08B1300BLUPR15MB0051namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Mar 2017 12:11:44.5116 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1NAM02HT063
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Mar 2017 12:11:46.0172 (UTC)
FILETIME=[2381EBC0:01D2A62A]
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:19:29 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Inquiry: Transaction Tiering
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 12:11:49 -0000
--_000_BLUPR15MB00516290185A5FC6B82F0D08B1300BLUPR15MB0051namp_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
agreed, the 'miner' term has run its course and plays a different role than=
it was originally set out to do, esp its original distributed nature. the =
'mining business' has become concentrated too much and resembles today's fi=
nancial institutions or simply banks, imho.
still, any form forking has dilutive effect on existing BTC holders.
thx, gm
________________________________
From: bitcoin-dev-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.org <bitcoin-dev-bounces@li=
sts.linuxfoundation.org> on behalf of Martin Stolze via bitcoin-dev <bitcoi=
n-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2017 1:15 PM
To: praxeology_guy
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Inquiry: Transaction Tiering
Thanks, those are valid concerns.
> Potentially miners could create their own private communication channel/l=
istening port for submitting transactions that they would not relay to othe=
r miners/the public node relay network.
That is the idea. Transaction Processors could source transactions
from the public mempool as well their proprietary mempool(s).
> Miners would be incentivized to not relay higher fee transactions, becaus=
e they would want to keep them to themselves for higher profits.
Not so, a user may want to incentivise a specific Transaction
Processor or many. A user can detect this behavior and withdraw his
future business if he notices that his transaction is not included in
a block despite there being transactions with lower fees included.
Remember, the transaction can be advertised to different mempools and
a Transaction Processor could lose this business to a competitor who
processes the next block if he holds it back.
Best Regards
Martin
PS: It seems not too late to get rid of misleading terms like "miner".
Block rewards (infrastructure subsidies) will be neglectable for
future generations and the analogy is exceedingly poor.
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 4:42 AM, praxeology_guy
<praxeology_guy@protonmail.com> wrote:
> Potentially miners could create their own private communication
> channel/listening port for submitting transactions that they would not re=
lay
> to other miners/the public node relay network. Users could then chose wh=
o
> they want to relay to. Miners would be incentivized to not relay higher =
fee
> transactions, because they would want to keep them to themselves for high=
er
> profits.
>
> Cheers,
> Praxeology Guy
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Inquiry: Transaction Tiering
> Local Time: March 22, 2017 12:48 PM
> UTC Time: March 22, 2017 5:48 PM
> From: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>
> Hi Tim,
> After writing this I figured that it was probably not evident at first
> sight as the concept may be quite novel. The physical location of the
> "miner" is indeed irrelevant, I am referring to the digital location.
> Bitcoins blockchain is a digital location or better digital "space".
> As far as I am concerned the authority lies with whoever governs this
> particular block space. A "miner" can, or can not, include my
> transaction.
>
> To make this more understandable:
>
> Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi can extend his caliphate into Bitcoins block
> space and rule sovereign(!) over a given block. If he processes my
> transaction my fee goes directly into the coffers of his organization.
> The same goes for the Queen of England or the Emperor of China. My
> interest is not necessarily aligned with each specific authority, yet
> as you point out, I can only not use Bitcoin.
> Alternatively, however, I can very well sign my transaction and send
> it to an authority of my choosing to be included into the ledger, say
> BitFurry. - This is what I describe in option 1.
>
> In order to protect my interest I do need to choose, maybe not today,
> but eventually.
>
> I also think that people do care who processes transactions and a lot
> of bickering could be spared if we could choose.
>
> If we assume a perfectly competitive market with 3 authorities that
> govern the block space equally, the marginal cost of 1/3 of the block
> space is the same for each, however, the marginal revenue absent of
> block rewards is dependent on fees.
> If people are willing to pay only a zero fee to a specific authority
> while a fee greater than zero to the others it's clear that one would
> be less competitive.
>
> Let us assume the fees are 10% of the revenue and the cost is 95 we
> have currently the following situation:
>
> A: Cost=3D95; Revenue=3D100; Profit=3D5
> B: Cost=3D95; Revenue=3D100; Profit=3D5
> C: Cost=3D95; Revenue=3D100; Profit=3D5
>
> With transaction tiering, the outcome could be different!
>
> A: Cost=3D95; Revenue=3D90; Loss=3D5 // BSA that does not respect user in=
terest.
> B: Cost=3D95; Revenue=3D105; Profit=3D10
> C: Cost=3D95; Revenue=3D105; Profit=3D10
>
> This could motivate transaction processors to behave in accordance
> with user interest, or am I missing something?
>
> Best Regards,
> Martin
>
>> From: Tim Ruffing <tim.ruffing@mmci.uni-saarland.de>
>> To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> Cc:
>> Bcc:
>> Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 16:18:26 +0100
>> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Inquiry: Transaction Tiering
>> (I'm not a lawyer...)
>>
>> I'm not sure if I can make sense of your email.
>>
>> On Mon, 2017-03-20 at 20:12 +0000, Martin Stolze via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>>> As a participant in the economy in general and of Bitcoin in
>>> particular, I desire an ability to decide where I transact. The
>>> current state of Bitcoin does not allow me to choose my place of
>>> business. As a consequence, I try to learn what would be the best way
>>> to conduct my business in good faith. [2]
>>
>> Ignoring the rest, I don't think that the physical location /
>> jurisdiction of the miner has any legal implications for law applicable
>> to the relationship between sender and receiver of a payment.
>>
>> This is not particular to Bitcoin. We're both in Germany (I guess).
>> Assume we have a contract without specific agreements and I pay you in
>> Icelandic kronur via PayPal (in Luxembourg) and my HTTPS requests to
>> PayPal went via Australia and the US. Then German law applies to our
>> contract, nothing in the middle can change that.
>>
>> Also ignoring possible security implications, there is just no need for
>> a mechanism that enables users to select miners. I claim that almost
>> nobody cares who will mine a transaction, because it makes no technical
>> difference. If you don't want a specific miner to mine your
>> transaction, then don't use Bitcoin.
>>
>> Tim
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
bitcoin-dev -- Bitcoin Protocol Discussion - Linux Foundation<https://lists=
.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>
lists.linuxfoundation.org
Bitcoin development and protocol discussion. This list is lightly moderated=
. - No offensive posts, no personal attacks. - Posts must concern developme=
nt of bitcoin ...
>
>
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
bitcoin-dev -- Bitcoin Protocol Discussion - Linux Foundation<https://lists=
.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>
lists.linuxfoundation.org
Bitcoin development and protocol discussion. This list is lightly moderated=
. - No offensive posts, no personal attacks. - Posts must concern developme=
nt of bitcoin ...
--_000_BLUPR15MB00516290185A5FC6B82F0D08B1300BLUPR15MB0051namp_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-=
1">
<style type=3D"text/css" style=3D"display:none;"><!-- P {margin-top:0;margi=
n-bottom:0;} --></style>
</head>
<body dir=3D"ltr">
<div id=3D"divtagdefaultwrapper" style=3D"font-size:12pt;color:#000000;font=
-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;" dir=3D"ltr">
<p>agreed, the 'miner' term has run its course and plays a different role t=
han it was originally set out to do, esp its original distributed natu=
re. the 'mining business' has become concentrated too much and resembles to=
day's financial institutions or simply
banks, imho. </p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>still, any form forking has dilutive effect on existing BTC holders=
.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>thx, gm</p>
<div style=3D"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<div>
<hr tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id=3D"x_divRplyFwdMsg" dir=3D"ltr"><font face=3D"Calibri, sans-serif" =
color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> bitcoin-dev-bounces=
@lists.linuxfoundation.org <bitcoin-dev-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.or=
g> on behalf of Martin Stolze via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, March 25, 2017 1:15 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> praxeology_guy<br>
<b>Cc:</b> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [bitcoin-dev] Inquiry: Transaction Tiering</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
</div>
<font size=3D"2"><span style=3D"font-size:10pt;">
<div class=3D"PlainText">Thanks, those are valid concerns.<br>
<br>
> Potentially miners could create their own private communication channe=
l/listening port for submitting transactions that they would not relay to o=
ther miners/the public node relay network.<br>
That is the idea. Transaction Processors could source transactions<br>
from the public mempool as well their proprietary mempool(s).<br>
<br>
> Miners would be incentivized to not relay higher fee transactions, bec=
ause they would want to keep them to themselves for higher profits.<br>
Not so, a user may want to incentivise a specific Transaction<br>
Processor or many. A user can detect this behavior and withdraw his<br>
future business if he notices that his transaction is not included in<br>
a block despite there being transactions with lower fees included.<br>
Remember, the transaction can be advertised to different mempools and<br>
a Transaction Processor could lose this business to a competitor who<br>
processes the next block if he holds it back.<br>
<br>
Best Regards<br>
Martin<br>
<br>
PS: It seems not too late to get rid of misleading terms like "miner&q=
uot;.<br>
Block rewards (infrastructure subsidies) will be neglectable for<br>
future generations and the analogy is exceedingly poor.<br>
<br>
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 4:42 AM, praxeology_guy<br>
<praxeology_guy@protonmail.com> wrote:<br>
> Potentially miners could create their own private communication<br>
> channel/listening port for submitting transactions that they would not=
relay<br>
> to other miners/the public node relay network. Users could then =
chose who<br>
> they want to relay to. Miners would be incentivized to not relay=
higher fee<br>
> transactions, because they would want to keep them to themselves for h=
igher<br>
> profits.<br>
><br>
> Cheers,<br>
> Praxeology Guy<br>
><br>
><br>
> -------- Original Message --------<br>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Inquiry: Transaction Tiering<br>
> Local Time: March 22, 2017 12:48 PM<br>
> UTC Time: March 22, 2017 5:48 PM<br>
> From: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br>
> To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br>
><br>
> Hi Tim,<br>
> After writing this I figured that it was probably not evident at first=
<br>
> sight as the concept may be quite novel. The physical location of the<=
br>
> "miner" is indeed irrelevant, I am referring to the digital =
location.<br>
> Bitcoins blockchain is a digital location or better digital "spac=
e".<br>
> As far as I am concerned the authority lies with whoever governs this<=
br>
> particular block space. A "miner" can, or can not, include m=
y<br>
> transaction.<br>
><br>
> To make this more understandable:<br>
><br>
> Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi can extend his caliphate into Bitcoins block<br>
> space and rule sovereign(!) over a given block. If he processes my<br>
> transaction my fee goes directly into the coffers of his organization.=
<br>
> The same goes for the Queen of England or the Emperor of China. My<br>
> interest is not necessarily aligned with each specific authority, yet<=
br>
> as you point out, I can only not use Bitcoin.<br>
> Alternatively, however, I can very well sign my transaction and send<b=
r>
> it to an authority of my choosing to be included into the ledger, say<=
br>
> BitFurry. - This is what I describe in option 1.<br>
><br>
> In order to protect my interest I do need to choose, maybe not today,<=
br>
> but eventually.<br>
><br>
> I also think that people do care who processes transactions and a lot<=
br>
> of bickering could be spared if we could choose.<br>
><br>
> If we assume a perfectly competitive market with 3 authorities that<br=
>
> govern the block space equally, the marginal cost of 1/3 of the block<=
br>
> space is the same for each, however, the marginal revenue absent of<br=
>
> block rewards is dependent on fees.<br>
> If people are willing to pay only a zero fee to a specific authority<b=
r>
> while a fee greater than zero to the others it's clear that one would<=
br>
> be less competitive.<br>
><br>
> Let us assume the fees are 10% of the revenue and the cost is 95 we<br=
>
> have currently the following situation:<br>
><br>
> A: Cost=3D95; Revenue=3D100; Profit=3D5<br>
> B: Cost=3D95; Revenue=3D100; Profit=3D5<br>
> C: Cost=3D95; Revenue=3D100; Profit=3D5<br>
><br>
> With transaction tiering, the outcome could be different!<br>
><br>
> A: Cost=3D95; Revenue=3D90; Loss=3D5 // BSA that does not respect user=
interest.<br>
> B: Cost=3D95; Revenue=3D105; Profit=3D10<br>
> C: Cost=3D95; Revenue=3D105; Profit=3D10<br>
><br>
> This could motivate transaction processors to behave in accordance<br>
> with user interest, or am I missing something?<br>
><br>
> Best Regards,<br>
> Martin<br>
><br>
>> From: Tim Ruffing <tim.ruffing@mmci.uni-saarland.de><br>
>> To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br>
>> Cc:<br>
>> Bcc:<br>
>> Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 16:18:26 +0100<br>
>> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Inquiry: Transaction Tiering<br>
>> (I'm not a lawyer...)<br>
>><br>
>> I'm not sure if I can make sense of your email.<br>
>><br>
>> On Mon, 2017-03-20 at 20:12 +0000, Martin Stolze via bitcoin-d=
ev wrote:<br>
>>> As a participant in the economy in general and of Bitcoin in<b=
r>
>>> particular, I desire an ability to decide where I transact. Th=
e<br>
>>> current state of Bitcoin does not allow me to choose my place =
of<br>
>>> business. As a consequence, I try to learn what would be the b=
est way<br>
>>> to conduct my business in good faith. [2]<br>
>><br>
>> Ignoring the rest, I don't think that the physical location /<br>
>> jurisdiction of the miner has any legal implications for law appli=
cable<br>
>> to the relationship between sender and receiver of a payment.<br>
>><br>
>> This is not particular to Bitcoin. We're both in Germany (I guess)=
.<br>
>> Assume we have a contract without specific agreements and I pay yo=
u in<br>
>> Icelandic kronur via PayPal (in Luxembourg) and my HTTPS requests =
to<br>
>> PayPal went via Australia and the US. Then German law applies to o=
ur<br>
>> contract, nothing in the middle can change that.<br>
>><br>
>> Also ignoring possible security implications, there is just no nee=
d for<br>
>> a mechanism that enables users to select miners. I claim that almo=
st<br>
>> nobody cares who will mine a transaction, because it makes no tech=
nical<br>
>> difference. If you don't want a specific miner to mine your<br>
>> transaction, then don't use Bitcoin.<br>
>><br>
>> Tim<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br>
> <a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-=
dev" id=3D"LPlnk881896" previewremoved=3D"true">
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a>
<div id=3D"LPBorder_GT_14905300907470.4314628742691553" style=3D"margin-bot=
tom: 20px; overflow: auto; width: 100%; text-indent: 0px;">
<table id=3D"LPContainer_14905300907390.9429467228958801" cellspacing=3D"0"=
style=3D"width: 90%; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); position: relat=
ive; overflow: auto; padding-top: 20px; padding-bottom: 20px; margin-top: 2=
0px; border-top: 1px dotted rgb(200, 200, 200); border-bottom: 1px dotted r=
gb(200, 200, 200);">
<tbody>
<tr valign=3D"top" style=3D"border-spacing: 0px;">
<td id=3D"TextCell_14905300907420.05214088929817473" colspan=3D"2" style=3D=
"vertical-align: top; position: relative; padding: 0px; display: table-cell=
;">
<div id=3D"LPRemovePreviewContainer_14905300907420.8166276469010367"></div>
<div id=3D"LPTitle_14905300907430.14484606878179007" style=3D"top: 0px; col=
or: rgb(0, 120, 215); font-weight: normal; font-size: 21px; font-family: wf=
_segoe-ui_light, "Segoe UI Light", "Segoe WP Light", &q=
uot;Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif; line-h=
eight: 21px;">
<a id=3D"LPUrlAnchor_14905300907440.8801382218354896" href=3D"https://lists=
.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" target=3D"_blank" style=
=3D"text-decoration: none;">bitcoin-dev -- Bitcoin Protocol Discussion - Li=
nux Foundation</a></div>
<div id=3D"LPMetadata_14905300907440.736217379707524" style=3D"margin: 10px=
0px 16px; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); font-weight: normal; font-family: wf_=
segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial,=
sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 14px;">
lists.linuxfoundation.org</div>
<div id=3D"LPDescription_14905300907460.7248311500000215" style=3D"display:=
block; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); font-weight: normal; font-family: wf_seg=
oe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sa=
ns-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; max-height: 100px; overflow: =
hidden;">
Bitcoin development and protocol discussion. This list is lightly moderated=
. - No offensive posts, no personal attacks. - Posts must concern developme=
nt of bitcoin ...</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<br>
<br>
><br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
id=3D"LPlnk394161" previewremoved=3D"true">https://lists.linuxfoundation.or=
g/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a>
<div id=3D"LPBorder_GT_14905300907840.5399313611030598" style=3D"margin-bot=
tom: 20px; overflow: auto; width: 100%; text-indent: 0px;">
<table id=3D"LPContainer_14905300907820.8151816162637471" cellspacing=3D"0"=
style=3D"width: 90%; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); position: relat=
ive; overflow: auto; padding-top: 20px; padding-bottom: 20px; margin-top: 2=
0px; border-top: 1px dotted rgb(200, 200, 200); border-bottom: 1px dotted r=
gb(200, 200, 200);">
<tbody>
<tr valign=3D"top" style=3D"border-spacing: 0px;">
<td id=3D"TextCell_14905300907830.5199495433130616" colspan=3D"2" style=3D"=
vertical-align: top; position: relative; padding: 0px; display: table-cell;=
">
<div id=3D"LPRemovePreviewContainer_14905300907830.36095528093563334"></div=
>
<div id=3D"LPTitle_14905300907830.14148417394525215" style=3D"top: 0px; col=
or: rgb(0, 120, 215); font-weight: normal; font-size: 21px; font-family: wf=
_segoe-ui_light, "Segoe UI Light", "Segoe WP Light", &q=
uot;Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif; line-h=
eight: 21px;">
<a id=3D"LPUrlAnchor_14905300907830.20590515024781242" href=3D"https://list=
s.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" target=3D"_blank" style=
=3D"text-decoration: none;">bitcoin-dev -- Bitcoin Protocol Discussion - Li=
nux Foundation</a></div>
<div id=3D"LPMetadata_14905300907830.7737769826803942" style=3D"margin: 10p=
x 0px 16px; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); font-weight: normal; font-family: wf=
_segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial=
, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 14px;">
lists.linuxfoundation.org</div>
<div id=3D"LPDescription_14905300907830.2687833551841585" style=3D"display:=
block; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); font-weight: normal; font-family: wf_seg=
oe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sa=
ns-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; max-height: 100px; overflow: =
hidden;">
Bitcoin development and protocol discussion. This list is lightly moderated=
. - No offensive posts, no personal attacks. - Posts must concern developme=
nt of bitcoin ...</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</div>
</body>
</html>
--_000_BLUPR15MB00516290185A5FC6B82F0D08B1300BLUPR15MB0051namp_--
|