From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
To: "Jorge Timón" <jtimon@jtimon•cc>,
"Bitcoin Protocol Discussion"
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>,
"Jorge Timón via bitcoin-dev"
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>,
"Christopher Allen" <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity•com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Claiming an OP_RETURN Prefix
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 21:46:18 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <367FF84A-219E-4735-B9F7-09CEFEB20587@petertodd.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDpOvXg7_Yv9jkX=+a7ALXHgA5-4Oh4ZQnzp=pw5-0bZPA@mail.gmail.com>
On August 15, 2018 8:33:43 PM UTC, "Jorge Timón via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>op_return outputs can be pruned because they are not spendable.
>putting a hash on in the witness script data won't make things better
>(it would actually make them worse) and it definitely doesn't help
>"block size bloat".
>I think I'm missing some context, but if you're using op_return purely
>for timestamping I would recommend using pay 2 contract instead.
If you're *actually* just doing timestamping you're better off using OpenTimestamps. But many times people think they're just doing timestamping in reality mere timestamps are insufficient for the task.
Notably, this is something the Satoshi Bitcoin white paper gets wrong, incorrectly describing Bitcoin as a timestamping system: timestamping is insufficient to prevent double-spends.
--
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-15 21:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-14 18:34 Christopher Allen
2018-08-15 20:33 ` Jorge Timón
2018-08-15 20:40 ` Jude Nelson
2018-08-15 21:54 ` Christopher Allen
2018-08-16 1:06 ` Luke Dashjr
2018-08-16 2:22 ` Lautaro Dragan
2018-08-16 2:37 ` Luke Dashjr
2018-08-16 17:32 ` Ryan Grant
2018-08-15 21:46 ` Peter Todd [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-08-05 21:11 Lautaro Dragan
2018-08-05 23:57 ` Peter Todd
2018-08-06 0:55 ` Lautaro Dragan
2018-08-06 1:54 ` CryptAxe
2018-08-06 2:04 ` Luke Dashjr
2018-08-06 2:19 ` Lautaro Dragan
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=367FF84A-219E-4735-B9F7-09CEFEB20587@petertodd.org \
--to=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
--cc=ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jtimon@jtimon$(echo .)cc \
/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