From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Ukgl0-0002dD-U5 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 06 Jun 2013 20:26:03 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.215.48 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.48; envelope-from=melvincarvalho@gmail.com; helo=mail-la0-f48.google.com; Received: from mail-la0-f48.google.com ([209.85.215.48]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Ukgkz-00042j-Kx for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 06 Jun 2013 20:26:02 +0000 Received: by mail-la0-f48.google.com with SMTP id lx15so1979873lab.21 for ; Thu, 06 Jun 2013 13:25:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.137.73 with SMTP id qg9mr629592lbb.87.1370550354832; Thu, 06 Jun 2013 13:25:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.2.8 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 13:25:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <201306061914.20006.luke@dashjr.org> Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 22:25:54 +0200 Message-ID: From: Melvin Carvalho To: "Andreas M. Antonopoulos" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011775510bf53604de821fe9 X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (melvincarvalho[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1Ukgkz-00042j-Kx Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: soft-fork to make anyone-can-spend outputs unspendable for 100 blocks X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 20:26:03 -0000 --089e011775510bf53604de821fe9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 6 June 2013 21:59, Andreas M. Antonopoulos wrote: > 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! > +1 we're still early into the bitcoin story ... unexpected reuse should not be ruled out ... > > > > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Luke-Jr wrote: > >> On Saturday, June 01, 2013 7:30:36 PM Peter Todd wrote: >> > scriptPubKey: 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 >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > 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 > > --089e011775510bf53604de821fe9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On 6 June 2013 21:59, Andreas M. Antonopoulos <= ;andreas@rootel= even.com> wrote:
Is there any consideration = given to the fact that bitcoin can operate as a platform for many other ser= vices, if it is able to be neutral to payload, as long as the fee is paid f= or 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.=A0

Is it possible to solve this by solving the issue of pr= ovably un-spendable outputs without foreclosing on the possibility of other= types of transaction payloads (ie, not money), that would open the possibi= lity for a myriad of layered apps above? For example, hashes of content tha= t is external to bitcoin, that people want to pay to have timestamped in th= e 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 cont= ent of the transaction, saying that some uses are not appropriate. If the f= ee is paid and it covers the size of the transaction, why would it matter i= f it is not a payment?=A0

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

+1 we're still early into the bitcoin story ... unexpected reuse sho= uld not be ruled out ...
=A0



On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wro= te:
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 m= ake IsStandard()
> so they will be relayed.

Data does not belong in the blockchain. People running nodes hav= e all
implicitly agreed to store the blocks for financial purposes, and storing d= ata
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 p= eople
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 dat= a 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-de= velopment


-----------------------------------------------------------= -------------------
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-develo= pment@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de= velopment


--089e011775510bf53604de821fe9--