public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Andreas M. Antonopoulos" <andreas@rooteleven.com>
To: Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org>
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: soft-fork to make anyone-can-spend outputs unspendable for 100 blocks
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 12:59:16 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFmyj8zG7iLnwm7iUwxyOXTe3SZxAOFoZdy3=oRa2WqYbiWsHQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201306061914.20006.luke@dashjr.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2698 bytes --]

Is there any consideration given to the fact that bitcoin can operate as a
platform for many other services, if it is able to be neutral to payload,
as long as the fee is paid for the transaction size?

Unless I have misunderstood this discussion, it seems to me that this is a
bit like saying in 1990 "IP Is only for email, the majority of users want
email, we shouldn't allow video, voice or images". Ooops, there goes the
web.

Is it possible to solve this by solving the issue of provably un-spendable
outputs without foreclosing on the possibility of other types of
transaction payloads (ie, not money), that would open the possibility for a
myriad of layered apps above? For example, hashes of content that is
external to bitcoin, that people want to pay to have timestamped in the
blockchain, as provably unspendable outputs.

The social compact is to accept transaction for fee. I think it is a major
mistake to make decisions that discriminate on the content of the
transaction, saying that some uses are not appropriate. If the fee is paid
and it covers the size of the transaction, why would it matter if it is not
a payment?

I could be totally misreading this thread, too, so please allow me some
slack if I have!




On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:

> On Saturday, June 01, 2013 7:30:36 PM Peter Todd wrote:
> > scriptPubKey: <data> OP_TRUE
> >
> > ...
> > Along with that change anyone-can-spend outputs should be make
> IsStandard()
> > so they will be relayed.
>
> Data does not belong in the blockchain. People running nodes have all
> implicitly agreed to store the blocks for financial purposes, and storing
> data
> is a violation of that social contract. Proof-of-stake may be arguably
> financial, but I'm sure there must be a way to do it without spamming
> people
> against their consent.
>
> > The alternative is sacrifices to unspendable outputs, which is very
> > undesirable compared to sending the money to miners to further
> > strengthen the security of the network.
>
> The alternative is to make other standard outputs unable to store data as
> well.
>
> Luke
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments:
> 1. A cloud service to automate IT design, transition and operations
> 2. Dashboards that offer high-level views of enterprise services
> 3. A single system of record for all IT processes
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/servicenow-d2d-j
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3740 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2013-06-06 20:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-06-06 19:14 [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: soft-fork to make anyone-can-spend outputs unspendable for 100 blocks Luke-Jr
2013-06-06 19:59 ` Andreas M. Antonopoulos [this message]
2013-06-06 20:07   ` Luke-Jr
2013-06-06 20:16     ` Andreas M. Antonopoulos
2013-06-06 21:48       ` Luke-Jr
2013-06-06 22:10         ` Melvin Carvalho
2013-06-06 20:25   ` Melvin Carvalho
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-06-01 19:30 Peter Todd
     [not found] ` <201306012034.31543.luke@dashjr.org>
2013-06-01 20:58   ` Peter Todd
     [not found] ` <38A06794-B6B4-45F3-99C1-24B08434536D@gmail.com>
2013-06-02  6:13   ` Peter Todd
2013-06-02 17:35     ` Jeff Garzik
2013-06-02 18:41       ` Peter Todd
2013-06-04  0:22     ` Mark Friedenbach
2013-06-02 21:45 ` Adam Back
2013-06-04 14:12   ` Jeff Garzik
2013-06-04 14:55     ` John Dillon
2013-06-04 17:42       ` Jeff Garzik
2013-06-04 18:36         ` Roy Badami
2013-06-04 18:49           ` Jeff Garzik
2013-06-04 20:25             ` Peter Todd
2013-06-03 23:43 ` Melvin Carvalho
2013-06-04  2:26   ` Michael Hendricks

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='CAFmyj8zG7iLnwm7iUwxyOXTe3SZxAOFoZdy3=oRa2WqYbiWsHQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=andreas@rooteleven.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=luke@dashjr.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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