From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 432361CF5 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 15:03:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-40136.protonmail.ch (mail-40136.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.136]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B08DB84F for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 15:03:53 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2019 15:03:39 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=default; t=1554390230; bh=vNS5zLSn1DN9WRb5l5JqWrlGUNngpLa4X29uKAIpiWM=; h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Feedback-ID: From; b=YupUnoHgEdvQ7HDYypbUoHmoYbAJhCS4m1oT+geexnLt8IcEpB8Qlxpn5S2Nw9pIJ X0tLHF/Fdzxu+DbQrV3royCn1DlIvGUY8COI2IrCL9VYQEk+5nBG0qMOg9n5ByMVPA Fl8hwUY8v83Yie+C5FB7Q/+ZQooMXCtSzoFtJB5c= To: ZmnSCPxj , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion From: ZmnSCPxj Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj Message-ID: <1ZxqlU561VPG4XszEcDYhWA28rvF5mjyAkLkG7qDxu-xIXXJ4iyCEl2jdikLHvgJcAOXwkUFNDLqom0zT25pICnuyzt235ODeazLVxuJTYA=@protonmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: Feedback-ID: el4j0RWPRERue64lIQeq9Y2FP-mdB86tFqjmrJyEPR9VAtMovPEo9tvgA0CrTsSHJeeyPXqnoAu6DN-R04uJUg==:Ext:ProtonMail MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, URI_NOVOWEL 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: Thu, 04 Apr 2019 15:42:36 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Smart Contracts Unchained X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2019 15:03:54 -0000 Somebody pointed out this to me: https://gavintech.blogspot.com/2014/06/bit-thereum.html I have updated the page accordingly. One thing that seems not mentioned in bit-thereum is the "as long as everyb= ody agrees" escape hatch, i.e. one branch which allows spending to anything= (including a transaction that violates the letter of the contract) as long= as all participants agree. This is gives my newer mechanism the ability to "fix" buggy contracts if ev= erybody involved can agree to the terms of a new contract, by simply abando= ning the existing contract and spending to the new contract. Regards, ZmnSCPxj Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 Original Me= ssage =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 On Thursday, April 4, 2019 9:55 AM, ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev wrote: > https://zmnscpxj.github.io/bitcoin/unchained.html > > Smart contracts have traditionally been implemented as part of the consen= sus rules of some blokchain. Often this means creating a new blockchain, or= at least a sidechain to an existing blockchain. This writeup proposes an a= lternative method without launching a separate blockchain or sidechain, whi= le achieving security similar to federated sidechains and additional benefi= ts to privacy and smart-contract-patching. > > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev