summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/e8/3d978ec39d26b38311d59ecef5d371b9a91894
blob: f1154c446f4c745dc34fc6da35390c11575dcb94 (plain)
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
Return-Path: <eric@voskuil.org>
Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::133])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6DAEC002D
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Wed, 18 May 2022 03:06:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0909404F3
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Wed, 18 May 2022 03:06:31 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.001
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001]
 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
 dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=voskuil-org.20210112.gappssmtp.com
Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id G5FvqTSVTyzx
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Wed, 18 May 2022 03:06:30 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-pl1-x633.google.com (mail-pl1-x633.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::633])
 by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3A5C404B3
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Wed, 18 May 2022 03:06:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pl1-x633.google.com with SMTP id i8so524608plr.13
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Tue, 17 May 2022 20:06:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=voskuil-org.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112;
 h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id
 :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index
 :content-language;
 bh=cVpJpDejwjsGzoOYmbMZuIrQRgvyACrIO0H44CJHL08=;
 b=IWCW7f3HuoUFZiq1m8U3ROV5mx1JVrHralf4M8cyLe8rS/bmD3R0DFpjWKEfBiO92C
 kvkOOY9VSayY30QbXJRMfBkvVF0m25GZDmbyH6/Px4KpBtbjvMXphAveTputsFbDaopo
 jSxT7rvSnmyWpDccA7kY5BGPnGu7rVHtKcDo/kbQG4Ss5H6kkKQr2bRmzufphhUyBJJD
 a9n4efCr5b5yIajnwKiU3Il/1CXfAXvdS+x6XnGyH+zBS+sdRysV9mVu8UTC0MlN3hZO
 KCVfV+3LZdUNN5G75hcBuPGEgMqYy5NXyDu21y2ntSTcULBhhN072Xbg/DeL2dH4sBB6
 l7Bg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
 h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date
 :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index
 :content-language;
 bh=cVpJpDejwjsGzoOYmbMZuIrQRgvyACrIO0H44CJHL08=;
 b=YvwkYbACyjSEB2ppEoceCFGuAg9FutunoccnPxYUkJW10edtqAL8nc5OKesNVWAkMP
 oJA2g4YX3D+fdJMbVXKfhm/xiOIsqQNG9DSFT5Jc8HiPTEa2cYWq7haW3SoLNb0CGFla
 yrLkauNUL2AxQ/GIFXvfzCNxUqerSHexBBgjGT+OA5jbXrO73jtG9F85fIK0IWkICWQD
 KNQMUVO3Xu5eiiN4TgO/eXJHsME0+qnnhjtbFN4zlZoIeZjR0q8wLC3a81zI9jIhkAyz
 hSqxaRJRsIEGbDPdTkTpmtJtUHlhdbVlYNJnzQ4BYw4QsYRcb8Jhrx+q2uFmreHokHk3
 SzKw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533v/d9p0CApOTmTPYruoBpDPFI3UKEJB4ngaje0AQNP9IYtRgRQ
 mYrJaP5VTmBG8MIXkxJbArmXCA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwp0qwxk4MNrhet8PNryFHKwwUqUHio1RVgFdUh0wtoLv2XTxiaMPkqBP0QNCnFufscUDkJDg==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:191a:b0:1dc:a3d3:f579 with SMTP id
 26-20020a17090a191a00b001dca3d3f579mr39763291pjg.30.1652843190162; 
 Tue, 17 May 2022 20:06:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ERICDESKTOP ([50.35.67.197]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
 o3-20020a62cd03000000b0050e006279bfsm475958pfg.137.2022.05.17.20.06.28
 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Tue, 17 May 2022 20:06:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: <eric@voskuil.org>
To: "'ZmnSCPxj'" <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
References: <f3892570-6c45-47ee-2804-9988ff18bdf5@riseup.net>
 <48D4B621-D862-4031-AE43-3F54D34FB0B5@voskuil.org>
 <ipHZZpEipF7oliIh-RlPP2e6rcWkIFW22jEOwaCPIfJUuoDh4JfmzvGC2i7tZK-kT0o0osyxFyWxZKDRZOWI_dqdSWNWOLR7KpN3CsN6BRE=@protonmail.com>
 <01c401d86a5c$956ddbd0$c0499370$@voskuil.org>
In-Reply-To: <01c401d86a5c$956ddbd0$c0499370$@voskuil.org>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 20:06:29 -0700
Message-ID: <01d901d86a64$452ef9d0$cf8ced70$@voskuil.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQNG5FH7rVDDJiwd0yZV2FzKY4oQ/AFkcJ/JAe3DhcICEHJataob22Nw
Content-Language: en-us
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, 18 May 2022 03:06:31 -0000

Good evening ZmnSCPxj,

Sorry for the long delay...

> Good morning e,
>=20
> > Good evening ZmnSCPxj,
> >
> > For the sake of simplicity, I'll use the terms lender (Landlord), =
borrower
> > (Lessor), interest (X), principal (Y), period (N) and maturity =
(height after N).
> >
> > The lender in your scenario "provides use" of the principal, and is =
paid
> > interest in exchange. This is of course the nature of lending, as a =
period
> > without one's capital incurs an opportunity cost that must be offset =
(by
> > interest).
> >
> > The borrower's "use" of the principal is what is being overlooked. =
To
> > generate income from capital one must produce something and sell it.
> > Production requires both capital and time. Borrowing the principle =
for the
> > period allows the borrower to produce goods, sell them, and return =
the
> > "profit" as interest to the lender. Use implies that the borrower is =
spending
> > the principle - trading it with others. Eventually any number of =
others end up
> > holding the principle. At maturity, the coin is returned to the =
lender (by
> > covenant). At that point, all people the borrower traded with are =
bag holders.
> > Knowledge of this scam results in an imputed net present zero value =
for the
> > borrowed principal.
>=20
> But in this scheme, the principal is not being used as money, but as a =
billboard
> for an advertisement.
>
> Thus, the bitcoins are not being used as money due to the use of the =
fidelity
> bond to back a "you can totally trust me I am not a bot!!" assertion.
> This is not the same as your scenario --- the funds are never =
transferred,
> instead, a different use of the locked funds is invented.
>=20
> As a better analogy: I am borrowing a piece of gold, smelting it down =
to make
> a nice shiny advertisement "I am totally not a bot!!", then at the end =
of the
> lease period, re-smelting it back and returning to you the same gold =
piece
> (with the exact same atoms constituting it), plus an interest from my =
business,
> which gained customers because of the shiny gold advertisement =
claiming "I
> am totally not a bot!!".
>=20
> That you use the same piece of gold for money does not preclude me =
using
> the gold for something else of economic value, like making a nice =
shiny
> advertisement, so I think your analysis fails there.
> Otherwise, your analysis is on point, but analyses something else =
entirely.

Ok, so you are suggesting the renting of someone else's proof of "burn" =
(opportunity cost) to prove your necessary expense - the financial =
equivalent of your own burn. Reading through the thread, it looks like =
you are suggesting this as a way the cost of the burn might be diluted =
across multiple uses, based on the obscuration of the identity. And =
therefore identity (or at least global uniqueness) enters the equation. =
Sounds like a reasonable concern to me.

It appears that the term "fidelity bond" is generally accepted, though I =
find this an unnecessarily misleading analogy. A bond is a loan (capital =
at risk), and a fidelity bond is also capital at risk (to provide =
assurance of some behavior). Proof of burn/work, such as Hash Cash (and =
Bitcoin), is merely demonstration of a prior expense. But in those =
cases, the expense is provably associated. As you have pointed out, if =
the burn is not associated with the specific use, it can be reused, =
diluting the demonstrated expense to an unprovable degree.

I can see how you come to refer to selling the PoB as "lending" it, =
because the covenant on the underlying coin is time constrained. But =
nothing is actually lent here. The "advertisement" created by the =
covenant (and its presumed exclusivity) is sold. This is also entirely =
consistent with the idea that a loan implies capital at risk. While this =
is nothing more than a terminology nit, the use of "fidelity bond" and =
the subsequent description of "renting" (the fidelity bond) both led me =
down another path (Tamas' proposal for risk free lending under covenant, =
which we discussed here years ago).

In any case, I tend to agree with your other posts on the subject. For =
the burn to be provably non-dilutable it must be a cost provably =
associated to the scenario which relies upon the cost. This provides the =
global uniqueness constraint (under cryptographic assumptions of =
difficulty).

Best,
e

> Regards,
> ZmnSCPxj