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 2F8DF25A for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 18:11:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-qt0-f182.google.com (mail-qt0-f182.google.com [209.85.216.182]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E746A132 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 18:11:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qt0-f182.google.com with SMTP id m5so79617785qtb.3 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 11:11:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=os9+TV3IxRBzgHkZIaZ5qG9h/Jx4LewI5PhO5uLpx0Q=; b=P3DXqsGWesI6Pe4s8kle4qxd7ipwajrqRL7fFucO/SX5aStupoxi/Xnlv4RmflFNnk dvLa6y5A55wMzdkLotLhwPRp++xq0YPzjC72jmPTGTmzZTBe51wjF7DX2q+yD/JaiTud JYdgLTJmraBV4VRekbksStgpgn/j9aisIZPUEae5Drq5KJ345Og9s11Qj8dLVSYBWc9x iwrIOOOddMYwp0RSpxSpy+aB4/tFFCbNdEecsbxgOIT0YtOqG7IygVUQ0WJiIUr8S2e6 7g4Ir0HKkDWbH0nCSX2KB7/258BRaJ2n2uqHHRaJUzIHTvLQB4TMSXgTxGnCHg+KrMR7 MXCw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=os9+TV3IxRBzgHkZIaZ5qG9h/Jx4LewI5PhO5uLpx0Q=; b=k/IjQoGGuUuxtleAjd1ME6NolHK+tIWpDDEkkTSmzoqyH//4I/KNDMhPHr+9N5ds08 5D0twjrklzj29MspFZY6CMMl54haFGmX6Y2dwx8+HyQzZ9rgRt+IO4d0tLuce3MKnyOc +g6lmXtEJUYCGxj5yVXoGV5xsK708wlHYZK7NFJpi7MXGaGRapN+ZuWwWCjWAe3BLu1o Mipb2DVh8MBYpTZ2VF+fBzjxltnJZ1ae7IDz7ps3VN2VW5Wd2oKbbh1TETsQiLI6FrsE y7+2zy585fbfyQAiSVC1tnlknCJjY4fU6RoTrxPBR+9PqzfZ87ivZz3RgSrCETZ1M88g 2i2A== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RlXIed7ttgBMeIAmzF3wGQiOsITTUisJ71geTbfLGBIo6hZHlWv9w7pQiXU1STZXCJGcY/V2TjrULuaOQ== X-Received: by 10.200.45.124 with SMTP id o57mr13762902qta.90.1476468686199; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 11:11:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.237.35.7 with HTTP; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 11:10:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20161014105757.GA8049@fedora-21-dvm> References: <20161014105757.GA8049@fedora-21-dvm> From: Sergio Demian Lerner Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 15:10:45 -0300 Message-ID: To: Peter Todd Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1143a4109020c2053ed72716 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] DPL is not only not enough, but brings unfounded confidence to Bitcoin users X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 18:11:28 -0000 --001a1143a4109020c2053ed72716 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Oh God... here we go again.. > > Again, lets remember that you personally proposed a BIP[1] that had the > effect > of aiding your ASICBOOST patent[2] without disclosing that fact in your > BIP nor > your pull-req[3]. > > This is false. The first sentence of the BIP states: "There are incentives for miners to find cheap, non-standard ways to generate new work which are not in the best interest of the protocol". The BIP actually PROTECTS the network from stealth Shared-Nonce mining and the fact you rejected it made the Bitcoin network LESS secure because now we just don't know at what extent it is in use. Shared-nonce mining can be done with or without that BIP/pull-req. We didn't disclose more in the BIP because it was not clear if shared-nonce mining (the fact that Bitcoin had a design flaw) would have a negative affect on Bitcoin price. ASICBoost patent may be a patent that protects Bitcoiners from mining centralization: ASICBoost is the only company that at this point showed interest in licensing the technology. But I do not control ASICBoost nor the patent so I cannot do anything about it. I propose we as a community do a crowdfund to try to license it from that company (or any other that wants to put theirs in the deal) and put all in public domain. --001a1143a4109020c2053ed72716 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Oh God... here we go again..

Again, lets remember that you personally proposed a BIP[1] that had = the effect
of aiding your ASICBOOST patent[2] without disclosing that fact in your BIP= nor
your pull-req[3].

This is false. The first sentence of the BIP states: = "There are incentives for miners to find cheap, non-standard ways to= =20 generate new work which are not in the best interest of the protocol".= =C2=A0

The BIP actually PROTECTS the network from stealt= h Shared-Nonce mining and the fact you rejected it made the Bitcoin network= LESS secure because now we just don't know at what extent it is in use= .

Shared-nonce mining can be done with or without that BI= P/pull-req.

We didn't disclose more in the BIP because it was n= ot clear if shared-nonce=20 mining (the fact that Bitcoin had a design flaw) would have a negative=20 affect on Bitcoin price.

ASICBoost patent may be a patent that prot= ects Bitcoiners from mining centralization: ASICBoost is the only company t= hat at this point showed interest in licensing the technology. But I do not= control ASICBoost nor the patent so I cannot do anything about it.

= I propose we as a community do a crowdfund to try to license it from that c= ompany (or any other that wants to put theirs in the deal) and put all in p= ublic domain.
--001a1143a4109020c2053ed72716--