From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr•org>
To: "Andreas M. Antonopoulos" <andreas@rooteleven•com>
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: soft-fork to make anyone-can-spend outputs unspendable for 100 blocks
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 20:07:38 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201306062007.41398.luke@dashjr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFmyj8zG7iLnwm7iUwxyOXTe3SZxAOFoZdy3=oRa2WqYbiWsHQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thursday, June 06, 2013 7:59:16 PM Andreas M. Antonopoulos wrote:
> Is there any consideration given to the fact that bitcoin can operate as a
> platform for many other services, if it is able to be neutral to payload,
> as long as the fee is paid for the transaction size?
This doesn't work like you might think: first of all, the fees today are
greatly subsidized - the actual cost to store data in the blockchain is much
higher than most storage solutions. Secondly, only the miner receives the
fees, not the majority of nodes which have to bear the burden of the data.
That is, the fee system is setup as an antispam/deterrant, not as payment for
storage.
> Unless I have misunderstood this discussion, it seems to me that this is a
> bit like saying in 1990 "IP Is only for email, the majority of users want
> email, we shouldn't allow video, voice or images". Ooops, there goes the
> web.
Not the same thing at all; nobody is forced to store/relay video/voice/images
without reimbursement. On the other hand, any full Bitcoin node is required to
at least download the entire blockchain once. And the network as a whole
suffers if nodes decide to start not-storing parts of the blockchain they
don't want to deal with.
> Is it possible to solve this by solving the issue of provably un-spendable
> outputs without foreclosing on the possibility of other types of
> transaction payloads (ie, not money), that would open the possibility for a
> myriad of layered apps above? For example, hashes of content that is
> external to bitcoin, that people want to pay to have timestamped in the
> blockchain, as provably unspendable outputs.
This is how merged mining solves the problem. A single extra hash in the
coinbase can link the bitcoin blockchain up with unlimited other data.
> The social compact is to accept transaction for fee. I think it is a major
> mistake to make decisions that discriminate on the content of the
> transaction, saying that some uses are not appropriate. If the fee is paid
> and it covers the size of the transaction, why would it matter if it is not
> a payment?
See above.
> I could be totally misreading this thread, too, so please allow me some
> slack if I have!
>
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr•org> wrote:
> > On Saturday, June 01, 2013 7:30:36 PM Peter Todd wrote:
> > > scriptPubKey: <data> OP_TRUE
> > >
> > > ...
> > > Along with that change anyone-can-spend outputs should be make
> >
> > IsStandard()
> >
> > > so they will be relayed.
> >
> > Data does not belong in the blockchain. People running nodes have all
> > implicitly agreed to store the blocks for financial purposes, and storing
> > data
> > is a violation of that social contract. Proof-of-stake may be arguably
> > financial, but I'm sure there must be a way to do it without spamming
> > people
> > against their consent.
> >
> > > The alternative is sacrifices to unspendable outputs, which is very
> > > undesirable compared to sending the money to miners to further
> > > strengthen the security of the network.
> >
> > The alternative is to make other standard outputs unable to store data as
> > well.
> >
> > Luke
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----- How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments:
> > 1. A cloud service to automate IT design, transition and operations
> > 2. Dashboards that offer high-level views of enterprise services
> > 3. A single system of record for all IT processes
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/servicenow-d2d-j
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
> > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-06 20:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-06 19:14 Luke-Jr
2013-06-06 19:59 ` Andreas M. Antonopoulos
2013-06-06 20:07 ` Luke-Jr [this message]
2013-06-06 20:16 ` Andreas M. Antonopoulos
2013-06-06 21:48 ` Luke-Jr
2013-06-06 22:10 ` Melvin Carvalho
2013-06-06 20:25 ` Melvin Carvalho
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-06-01 19:30 Peter Todd
[not found] ` <201306012034.31543.luke@dashjr.org>
2013-06-01 20:58 ` Peter Todd
[not found] ` <38A06794-B6B4-45F3-99C1-24B08434536D@gmail.com>
2013-06-02 6:13 ` Peter Todd
2013-06-02 17:35 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-06-02 18:41 ` Peter Todd
2013-06-04 0:22 ` Mark Friedenbach
2013-06-02 21:45 ` Adam Back
2013-06-04 14:12 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-06-04 14:55 ` John Dillon
2013-06-04 17:42 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-06-04 18:36 ` Roy Badami
2013-06-04 18:49 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-06-04 20:25 ` Peter Todd
2013-06-03 23:43 ` Melvin Carvalho
2013-06-04 2:26 ` Michael Hendricks
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201306062007.41398.luke@dashjr.org \
--to=luke@dashjr$(echo .)org \
--cc=andreas@rooteleven$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox