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 EEC2F258 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 18:12:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-io0-f174.google.com (mail-io0-f174.google.com [209.85.223.174]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68B371AE for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 18:12:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iofl186 with SMTP id l186so64576605iof.2 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:12:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UYVDbOz0uVoEwUOVfhOU8lzapHv9xmKpPWVkh0V1K/U=; b=W+RZq7p9Enk1yqe/xoLvD8CIQFkX5dEjA7GpRrmesk6J3/+5wNdtxJ/mb2yEKxZEzH aSzlMNega3yYUIF5QXawDLHwKQkU29y+szs5/5nDLAb0ZgHrxVDXbp0P6lIp9ZQRCBnX owcGAXhdBAxiTlRy/XTh5iYqf9GYK4pwpIyEpVRyuCdUnETYJggrItVCz5M5ZproRxEG GyjLNvS3kMXYAwTtLix10flXtQYf9SaJBYo3LcgdtaZy4C8t11NoqMAVVo4eJWWJO7or pa10YjsoYASK7amtYJYzyDtww7gzXqegeisWytm7iW/UV5G5uHJ6+T4G9lYyF9Clws1f Fd9Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.30.12 with SMTP id e12mr5611864ioe.57.1444846347793; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:12:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.66.195 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:12:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 13:12:27 -0500 Message-ID: From: Bryan Bishop To: =?UTF-8?Q?Emin_G=C3=BCn_Sirer?= , Bryan Bishop Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev , Ittay Eyal Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin-NG whitepaper. X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 18:12:29 -0000 On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Emin G=C3=BCn Sirer wrote: > while the whitepaper has all the nitty gritty details: > http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.02037 Taking reward compensation back by fraud proofs is not enough to fix the problems associated with double spending (such as, everyone has to wait for the "real" confirmations instead of the "possibly double-spend" confirmations). Some of this was discussed in -wizards recently: http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-wizards/2015-09-19.log For a system based entirely on fraud proofs and threat of fraud proofs, see fidelity-bonded ledgers: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2013-February/002189= .html https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D146307.0 - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507