public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Billy Tetrud <billy.tetrud@gmail.com>
To: Casey Rodarmor <casey@rodarmor.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Draft-BIP: Ordinal Numbers
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2022 22:59:56 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGpPWDbquYT4gm_eKTrtsHsCNRf2fU0gvHOz--jRVhVgUzFHYQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANLPe+OA1ddkfRYLsA25GZkw9=+AMni99Nsz31-PUHdEB--R+g@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2124 bytes --]

>  what if/when we introduce some Monero-like system and hide coin amounts?

I really don't see a world where bitcoin goes that route. Hiding coin
amounts would make it impossible to audit the blockchain and verify that
there hasn't been inflation and the emission schedule is on schedule. It
would inherently remove unconditional soundness from bitcoin and replace it
with computational soundness. Even if bitcoin did adopt it, it would keep
backwards compatibility with old style addresses which could continue to
use ordinals.

On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 3:03 PM Casey Rodarmor <casey@rodarmor.com> wrote:

> > One thought I had was: what happens if/when it comes to pass that we
> increase payment precision by going sub-satoshi on chain? It seems like it
> would be fairly simple to extend that to ordinals by having fraction
> ordinals like 1.1 or 4.85. Could be an interesting thought to add to the
> proposal.
>
> I think it's probably premature to make a concrete proposal, since any
> proposal made now might be inapplicable to the actual form that a precision
> increase takes.
>
> > What you mean by "the same transaction id" here is unclear. I was
> interpreting the proposal to mean that UTXOs are all assigned a set of
> ordinals, and when that UTXO is spent, it transfers it's ordinals to
> outputs in the transaction the UTXO is spent in. Is that what you mean by
> this sentence? If so, I'd suggest rewording.
>
> There are two pairs of old transactions with duplicate IDs, from blocks
> 91812 and 91842, and 91722 91880. (It's no longer possible to create
> transactions with duplicate IDs, since the BIP 34 soft fork that required
> the height be included in coinbase transaction inputs, making them have
> guaranteed unique IDs.)
>
> This section of the spec defines what ordinal ranges such duplicate
> transactions contain. It tries to match the behavior of Bitcoin Core, which
> considers the second transaction with a given ID to render unspendable
> current UTXOs created by a transaction with the same ID.
>
> I'll add some detail to this part of the BIP, and talk about why this rule
> is needed.
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2638 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2022-02-25  5:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-02-23  0:43 [bitcoin-dev] Draft-BIP: Ordinal Numbers Casey Rodarmor
2022-02-23  7:02 ` damian
2022-02-23  7:10   ` Casey Rodarmor
2022-02-23  7:24   ` damian
2022-02-23  7:31     ` Casey Rodarmor
2022-02-24  2:34       ` damian
2022-02-24 15:55         ` Billy Tetrud
2022-02-24 21:03           ` Casey Rodarmor
2022-02-25  4:59             ` Billy Tetrud [this message]
2022-02-25 11:17               ` AdamISZ
2022-02-25 15:56                 ` Billy Tetrud
2022-02-24  7:02   ` vjudeu
2022-02-24  7:17     ` Casey Rodarmor
2022-02-24 17:52 vjudeu
2022-02-24 21:02 ` Casey Rodarmor

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=CAGpPWDbquYT4gm_eKTrtsHsCNRf2fU0gvHOz--jRVhVgUzFHYQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=billy.tetrud@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=casey@rodarmor.com \
    /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