From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5EAC002D for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 19:17:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B932940587 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 19:17:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org B932940587 Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=petertodd.org header.i=@petertodd.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=ZzESeAeb; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=UdLddhJS X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.402 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.402 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UGaQa7LkfwqQ for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 19:17:40 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org C4CAE402E7 Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4CAE402E7 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 19:17:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 865FB320091B; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 15:17:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 23 Jun 2022 15:17:39 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=petertodd.org; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender :subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1656011859; x=1656098259; bh=We vKmUjqiBflm8ORRVah4g+6BWl5C7FnhncMJeSX5oM=; b=ZzESeAebtJ4TUhJWKy u7YjMmMUqMUpmz6M3nfu85nqM0QcSCn2lr2o1zJu5L9DS23csNY+kPOZ56cYbZB0 b7TkIGw4gJKYVaybGH7J5Yk3qrlbi8JsuNqiLWHkjTF+QNCv0mP3xzxplOpPtt/j 0jP5oIMJ0mSODfbe14HP5M5ayoXkmaKAfLIG22Go7IAyXzrX0+1FlZSikh/iRMyI s1PcVHUzJkSNqBr9ZgtGADiLOysTYXzLTxRR79bBZ7ksrtmmptdGUO1FWirzfUU3 8nhOCgHH7mTnz3aiy6TD0ANGNkyZI38PSwlGqkZxVVveO+GN8RdUYHzzXc3nLuff q86g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1656011859; x=1656098259; bh=WevKmUjqiBflm8ORRVah4g+6BWl5 C7FnhncMJeSX5oM=; b=UdLddhJSP9COAoPWPQCEQ+Yr519UGV4TKJYwwj3ljRkm oCv0ddMDAJGJUiNF/YGkDmXmZawh5htuwUuVlx+FGNzfyhZm+3J1iYDonkiNwyjY 26bri/kuY7OXroanBtd19YBNDbgTu3rpi3uVYQQS6WI5lntIvyZZFrUm1J/5enjD DAEJnx8dtTbDBZt05VXR1+pLKe8qV2ELMmgjSYN/SuGr/xkJ6cwq2KWyb1oCDKjq RXKkelIL+8Iykr+QQVFXp9ABK1DMJjk5tUV+u7ar4SoyqmwXGI9l9Puwl8hbmm2y BifhLR8K1kfJmGqjcrKFs7USTc173xY+HeKMguZp1A== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrudefjedgudefiecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehgtderredttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefrvght vghrucfvohguugcuoehpvghtvgesphgvthgvrhhtohguugdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepledvleelffdtudekudffjefgfeejueehieelfedtgfetudetgeegveeutefh jedtnecuffhomhgrihhnpehpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuih iivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepuhhsvghrsehpvghtvghrthhouggu rdhorhhg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 15:17:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 11CC622B56; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 15:17:37 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 15:17:37 -0400 From: Peter Todd To: Keagan McClelland , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4NEoio4n8h4XRnwt" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin covenants are inevitable X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 19:17:42 -0000 --4NEoio4n8h4XRnwt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 01:00:07PM -0600, Keagan McClelland via bitcoin-dev= wrote: > > The PoW security of Bitcoin benefits all Bitcoin users, proportional to > the > value of BTC they hold; if Bitcoin blocks aren't reliably created the val= ue > of > *all* BTC goes down. It doesn't make sense for the entire cost of that > security > to be paid for on a per-tx basis. And there's a high chance paying for it > on a > per-tx basis won't work anyway due to lack of consistent demand. >=20 > FWIW I prefer the demurrage route. Having something with finite supply as= a > means of measuring economic activity is unprecedented and I believe deeply > important. I'm sympathetic to the argument that the security of the chain > should not be solely the responsibility of transactors. We realize the > value of money on receipt, hold *and* spend and it would be appropriate f= or > there to be a balance of fees to that effect. While inflation may be > simpler to implement (just chop off the last few halvings), I think it > would be superior (on the assumption that such a hodl tax was necessary) = to > keep the supply fixed and have people's utxo balances decay, at least at > the level of the UX. Demurrage makes protocols like Lightning much more complex, and isn't compatible with existing implementations. While demurrage could in theory be implemented in a soft-fork by forcing txs to contain an output with the demurrage-taxed amount, spending to a pool of future mining fees, I really don't think it's practical to actually do that. Anyway, demurrage and inflation have identical economic properties. They're both a tax on savings. The only difference is the way that tax is implement= ed. --=20 https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org --4NEoio4n8h4XRnwt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEFcyURjhyM68BBPYTJIFAPaXwkfsFAmK0vE0ACgkQJIFAPaXw kfuuFgf/etzuBqQ0lEYQh9NMC4ngtKDIFasTgmHRtGENpnqVOvjPR9+zB+XyFSw1 TAHcw5OpgzCPUZ4xnuDMu2jUTYSqbzvexXOz5YxNQu3HpViV7Ot/eIH4SHd/j8lz 7pGRnybHUcjGT3spZgqjLWJ2ihffTbvIn5TVYPK3CSVU9fMPBIECwTFETKrggE2G 2W9E5oceseSGhaWxikumLlHby1gxGrmWHLzVGWq0OTJm32BLs7q5fgOnsDhgFIND a0xoFVBxZjjDWdeXwVWjTYwC3LCY9okL5LM3dcjLg+UwFQecQJ007Zk/+HXAgEGC 1dChNu6POUrrLExaLR0WdRNciZs+sQ== =c0Ef -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4NEoio4n8h4XRnwt--