From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WYCPU-0004jY-NI for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 10:40:44 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.219.41 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.219.41; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f41.google.com; Received: from mail-oa0-f41.google.com ([209.85.219.41]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WYCPT-0005St-08 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 10:40:44 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id j17so4276610oag.0 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 03:40:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.51.227 with SMTP id n3mr13452856oeo.33.1397126437371; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 03:40:37 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.96.180 with HTTP; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 03:40:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5EA7E1CA-2673-49D4-A1C4-015117E5133D@bitsofproof.com> References: <53456B99.9010207@monetize.io> <00b77560-d7ed-4ed4-a4e5-eb1f00467a06@email.android.com> <0509477C-89F9-47C7-8820-29ACAD4A4A8E@bitsofproof.com> <534592E2.7040800@gmail.com> <5345986C.3040901@gmail.com> <77889B25-03D6-4401-A5FE-432976951F55@bitsofproof.com> <5EA7E1CA-2673-49D4-A1C4-015117E5133D@bitsofproof.com> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 12:40:37 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: MIGLQ7HDMfUSqQEbF4zb3RW4A8A Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Tamas Blummer Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2fdf601dfdb04f6add978 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) 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 (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 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: 1WYCPT-0005St-08 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoind-in-background mode for SPV wallets 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, 10 Apr 2014 10:40:44 -0000 --001a11c2fdf601dfdb04f6add978 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > 1) There is no catch 22 as there are plenty of ways getting bitcoin > without bootstrapping a full node. > I think I maybe wasn't clear. To spend coins you need transaction data. Today, the dominant model is that people get that data by scanning the block chain. If you can obtain the transaction data without doing that then, either: 1) Someone is doing chain scanning for free. See my point about "why pay if you can get it for free". 2) You got your tx data direct from the person you who sent you the funds, perhaps via the payment protocol. This would resolve the catch 22 by allowing you to spend bitcoins without actually having talked to the P2P network first, but we're a loooooong way from this world. And that's it. I don't think there are any other ways to get the tx data you need. Either someone gives it to you in the act of spending, or someone else gives it away for free, undermining the charge-for-the-p2p-network model. --001a11c2fdf601dfdb04f6add978 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
1) Ther= e is no catch 22 as there are plenty of ways getting bitcoin without bootst= rapping a full node.

I = think I maybe wasn't clear. To spend coins you need transaction data. T= oday, the dominant model is that people get that data by scanning the block= chain. If you can obtain the transaction data without doing that then, eit= her:

1) Someone = is doing chain scanning for free. See my point about "why pay if you c= an get it for free".

2) You got your tx data direct from the person you who sent you the funds, = perhaps via the payment protocol. This would resolve the catch 22 by allowi= ng you to spend bitcoins without actually having talked to the P2P network = first, but we're a loooooong way from this world.

And that= 9;s it. I don't think there are any other ways to get the tx data you n= eed. Either someone gives it to you in the act of spending, or someone else= gives it away for free, undermining the charge-for-the-p2p-network model.<= /div>
--001a11c2fdf601dfdb04f6add978--