From: paul snow <snow.paul@gmail•com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] one-show signatures (Re: The relationship between Proof-of-Publication and Anti-Replay Oracles)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 18:56:28 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMU7uiu_wmsZRf6tXdE--rXLb6DSwJHs2YnspQ-cCoN_dw62JA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141221185126.GC18711@savin.petertodd.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1210 bytes --]
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 12:51 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 06:10:47PM +0000, Adam Back wrote:
> > Yes you could for example define a new rule that two signatures
> > (double-spend) authorises something - eg miners to take funds. (And
> > this would work with existing ECDSA addresses & unrestricted R-value
> > choices).
> >
> > I wasnt really making a point other than an aside that it maybe is
> > sort-of possible to do with math what you said was not possible where
> > you said "This [preventing signing more than one message] is
> > impossible to implement with math alone".
>
> Introducing a bunch of clever ECDSA math doesn't change the fact that
> the clever math isn't what is preventing double-spending, clever
> economics is. Just like Bitcoin itself.
>
> No sense getting people potentially confused by a bunch of complex
> equations that aren't relevant to the more fundemental and much more
> important principle that math alone can't prevent double-spending.
Math alone describes all of Bitcoin's structure; as math is a way to model
reality, it has no limits. Saying Math can't prevent double-spending is
near equivalent to saying it cannot be done.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1651 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-22 0:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-21 18:10 Adam Back
2014-12-21 18:51 ` Peter Todd
2014-12-22 0:56 ` paul snow [this message]
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=CAMU7uiu_wmsZRf6tXdE--rXLb6DSwJHs2YnspQ-cCoN_dw62JA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=snow.paul@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
/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