From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org> Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FF5BC002B for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 12:51:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0679C81301 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 12:51:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 0679C81301 Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=c3upiIdE X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.603 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.603 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4WyFG7u7UoHB for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 12:51:43 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org B8B5F812F5 Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8B5F812F5 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 12:51:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B438B5C0099; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 07:51:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 01 Feb 2023 07:51:41 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender :subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t=1675255901; x=1675342301; bh=2 7Qy9sYmpHFhJvQdA/UDTilmzgkrMyQoxFrAYacCtKg=; b=c3upiIdED1RT12DVf /PvI65XD6fxIsE/3G2GduBpZXSj21Lrs+hUnimRQSar9sfJBxT00MRwGiP6rlrSi ORMzNdHGifXL2WRnkNGeCJdoWb+3koqtGUlv60XKaW6/Yq2a1qn3QjtBVjzVRkI0 cUQoB74Vfb2mLh8CvAY4dQ+86KMbv8RRLHNfowtVQjAoGcQwvoEUXy6AOwifFQuU v63ZrYYqNROilaqAkUbVNzZMsm1IWA5sB6qHCHj/PDonu57yOcRxKpEOc/I8+8oz HXcSyHSOiNjfPBHh5SXc6WhGw8v5/OUKQ8e/mpWC7AvRVi7CAkmlcQJ6yITRe1HZ h+2Cg== X-ME-Sender: <xms:XWDaY4NEIBPUulh9qmKXmm20dPWwHlR9s7xc2cQ_8xl2lUtHvH6ukg> <xme:XWDaY-_5BC2N5jbtymk07m2QdZXnJsxBd2ecZLq1bmaxv9GixtlUkVAOugFD7Cn5B Gh4RAiax6nbocPyAOw> X-ME-Received: <xmr:XWDaY_R8X0XUPVPWtaXKnm34R__gdZreOMD11rvnLeWyyLyC6tmyZmH9N87MV4E> X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrudefiedggeehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvffufggjfhfkgggtgfesthhqmhdttderjeenucfhrhhomheprfgvthgv rhcuvfhougguuceophgvthgvsehpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhgqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpefhteeuleffvddujeejteejjefgjeefleeiieejudeiiedvueegffefueeglefg ueenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehpvg htvgesphgvthgvrhhtohguugdrohhrgh X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:XWDaYwvYvmEoqRSjjPq-chlJxn3sLI54ee6qWsRfVdN0EFWBVrOSHw> <xmx:XWDaYwejwwSUqwRM5ugFk7s7MzaB0Boh_TNMFs12n4LhL5mEQ0QL8g> <xmx:XWDaY01QH6m7KS3qy5rg5yE6JA8OlJN-4HEl_QjS16xBGxKJ_ca7YA> <xmx:XWDaY_6ZL2p7zpV_PCoSr96QZwNPAqdMsW7LKoZyD2XlRyuFxyUv5A> Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 07:51:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2023 12:51:38 +0000 From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> To: Kostas Karasavvas <kkarasavvas@gmail.com>, Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com>, Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: <CABE6yHtbgD_5kCHMu9P9ThbqRHnzXMERRZsu7_6H20CAcQuEww@mail.gmail.com> References: <CACrqygAMsO1giYuxm=DZUqfeRjEqGM7msmEnZ-AHws3oA2=aqw@mail.gmail.com> <764E460B-C0C6-47B8-A97E-F7CBC81FD645@petertodd.org> <CACrqygD8ZF-PqKuFK7-SgiPdZQ9ewt+9QGXytpf8+NYjjNjyfA@mail.gmail.com> <CABE6yHtbgD_5kCHMu9P9ThbqRHnzXMERRZsu7_6H20CAcQuEww@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <BF0364BD-E25A-444D-91AE-DAAB44C82B76@petertodd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Debate: 64 bytes in OP_RETURN VS taproot OP_FALSE OP_IF OP_PUSH X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2023 12:51:45 -0000 On February 1, 2023 8:36:52 AM GMT, Kostas Karasavvas <kkarasavvas@gmail= =2Ecom> wrote: >With OP_RETURN you publish some data that are immediately visible in the >blockchain=2E I would consider this better (more straightforward) for thi= ngs >like time-stamping=2E You are incorrect=2E Time-stamps merely prove that data existed prior to s= ome point in time=2E There is absolutely no need for anything to be publish= ed in the blockchain to create a timestamp=2E Indeed, efficient timestamps = don't actually publish any meaningful data: for efficiency you always combi= ne many timestamps into a single merkle tree; a merkle tree tip digest is m= eaningless data by itself=2E OpenTimestamps does in fact use OpReturn rather than something more effici= ent=2E But it does this only because the efficiency gain isn't significant = enough for me to have gotten around to improving it=2E Reducing fee costs b= y ~10% isn't a good use of my time=2E >With Taproot you need to spend the utxo to make the script visible=2E Thi= s >seems better when you don't want the data public but you need to be able = to >reveal the data when the time comes=2E If your concern is the data being public due to OpReturn vs Taproot, you a= re confused and need to think more carefully about what exactly you are doi= ng=2E