public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: soft-fork to make anyone-can-spend outputs unspendable for 100 blocks
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2013 13:35:10 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJHLa0OEUfsZX5caF-urE+Tu9tpgf9xuVjskfoEC8nXO2yZ4ow@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130602061327.GA14148@savin>

On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 2:13 AM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
> I'd say we tell people to sacrifice to (provably) unspendable for now
> and do a soft-fork later if there is real demand for this stuff in the
> future.

That seems fair.

In general, people are actively bloating the UTXO set with unspendable
outputs (that cannot be 100% proven unspendable).  Provably
unspendable seems like an improvement on long term UTXO health.

It is a fair criticism that this inches the incentives, a bit, towards
timestamping and other non-currency uses.  But those uses (a) cannot
be prevented and (b) have already been automated anyway (e.g. the
python upload/download tools stored in-chain).

I do think the overwhelming majority of users are invested in
bitcoin-the-currency (or bitcoin-the-commodity, take your pick), i.e.
the value proposition.  That's our 98% use case.  Given the relative
volumes of traffic, timestamping/data storage/messaging is essentially
getting a free ride.  So IMO it is worth continuing to explore
/disincentives/ for use of the blockchain for data storage and
messaging, for the rare times where a clear currency-or-data-storage
incentive is available.

-- 
Jeff Garzik
Senior Software Engineer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc.      https://bitpay.com/



  reply	other threads:[~2013-06-02 17:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-06-01 19:30 [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: soft-fork to make anyone-can-spend outputs unspendable for 100 blocks 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 [this message]
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
2013-06-06 19:14 Luke-Jr
2013-06-06 19:59 ` Andreas M. Antonopoulos
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

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=CAJHLa0OEUfsZX5caF-urE+Tu9tpgf9xuVjskfoEC8nXO2yZ4ow@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=jgarzik@bitpay.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=pete@petertodd.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