From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UDZL0-0001Ey-OG for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 11:50:18 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org designates 62.13.148.154 as permitted sender) client-ip=62.13.148.154; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org; helo=outmail148154.authsmtp.co.uk; Received: from outmail148154.authsmtp.co.uk ([62.13.148.154]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1UDZKy-0003bt-QV for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 11:50:18 +0000 Received: from mail-c232.authsmtp.com (mail-c232.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.232]) by punt6.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/Kp) with ESMTP id r27BYxJv065614 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 11:34:59 GMT Received: from savin (76-10-178-109.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.178.109]) (authenticated bits=128) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id r27BYtOu065088 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 11:34:57 GMT Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 06:34:55 -0500 From: Peter Todd To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <20130307113455.GA893@savin> References: <20130307110018.GA7491@savin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="PNTmBPCT7hxwcZjr" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130307110018.GA7491@savin> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Server-Quench: 0a6def8b-871b-11e2-b10b-0025903375e2 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVJwpGK10IU0Fd P1hXKl1LNVAaWXld WiVPGEoXDxgzCjYj NEgGOBsDNw4AXwJ1 LRkLXVBSFQZ4AB0L BRoUVxE8cANYeX5u ZEFqQHFbVVt/fUFi QwAWF2p0DCMfLWAZ VUBQf01RcgNIMB8U bAQqAntffG0AZyh9 RlY+ZXU7ZG1VbXwN GFxcdQlJHhsGRCgG SkJKLh8uAUYCRiN2 IxE4J1obBEMcNFkH eX8oQ10VdhUWDQZd BAlEBiMRLFQHXC0x FgNbRSYA X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1019:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 76.10.178.109/587 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Headers-End: 1UDZKy-0003bt-QV Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Large-blocks and censorship X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 11:50:18 -0000 --PNTmBPCT7hxwcZjr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 06:00:18AM -0500, Peter Todd wrote: > It's also notably that auditable off-chain transaction systems are > vulnerable. All of the trustworthy ones that don't rely on trusted > hardware require at least some of their on-chain transactions to be > publicly known, specifically so that the total amount of reserves held > by off-chain transaction providers can be audited. At best you can use > Gregory Maxwell's suggestion of maintaining a "reserve" account backed > by funds that rarely move, where new deposits go to non-public addresses > and result in the depositor receiving funds from the reserve account, > but again, if the spendability of those funds is in question, the value > of the reserve itself is also in question. Additionally miners can block > fidelity bond sacrifice transactions easily; again a critical > technologies required to implement some types of off-chain transaction > systems, as well as for many other purposes. Oh, and it occured to me: merge-mining is also vulnerable to the exact same censorship forces. Again, with small blocks running P2Pool is feasible, and P2Pool does merge-mining just fine. With large blocks it's easy for the pool to ignore shares that try to merge mine, so your alt-chains competition is also censored. --=20 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org --PNTmBPCT7hxwcZjr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJROHteAAoJEH+rEUJn5PoEfMQH/jBFGbuioGnnn1LThKpe0M09 hHxtdoyyxfhrlHveF+AvorC8nxuLTokLsq9stWLrCBHEZYY0X91c6eroo3F5hEcf GarxV1Jw5jWd1bBbfveNjqBY5JMl2O+V35B09uZ/oGmspFrCKBK9hXRcgQRSvPiP dipYzRORUmVyYBEceti6oOIrg9LpFHQfP3U4dzIWlx8HvyaOeo1f+rnfaYQ/dJVy uESw3dEfP+gcSOjQdhFFKrUGu2WUbpg8dheJyqJo6faso5AXDBuadinDxa2MasDT VSZwmtlSRF2Z3ZfIRt5OzKLwh/GGs+HzwKG5JRp3+P8E3FrgCrRryoc8gpR0XoQ= =528E -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --PNTmBPCT7hxwcZjr--