1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
|
Return-Path: <eric@voskuil.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBDAA14DD
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 6 Jul 2019 01:28:05 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pg1-f196.google.com (mail-pg1-f196.google.com
[209.85.215.196])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A0C44C3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 6 Jul 2019 01:28:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pg1-f196.google.com with SMTP id m4so4976402pgk.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 05 Jul 2019 18:28:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to;
bh=nMMXiygY0N2teNm6cfq9xHynOPgL7qdhgPho9qZJUoY=;
b=w0m8iqJSGFWrM2FHkkJxYwFcgBdxr08MsZSQU6Cw/7muwwGWIzbqt+d+R5MNdHDZy/
wh5JN299djBzElJOhxxeReTCOVb+/hVlVXdMI9mIerq8NdKcmBkMLODWL1miRk6AiFje
HjRbAQxFNBDvB1vfevfx4KjGQaFmRae+QYAzaZocwgGxHvHMCH0/JYvloDXY1xaKMWta
IkzRhiY/3levBjWRpv0yZsdBY1upaSYKYGb/6Sd5sRcR3CFrVS0KXAq8UnrSVmtkoH8Z
4OmYcLaqsXrOgUujMhVUQ3cXxpQthTig44DzYYwuv6D7J244Xtbli5GtDw9tZ4fKfVPu
GFjQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to;
bh=nMMXiygY0N2teNm6cfq9xHynOPgL7qdhgPho9qZJUoY=;
b=jePhgoS5cy8Flm5HsysQKPgbG3/5GmNWrrqbeqrmyT9HlqPCR9Fcw9kHcAg0t4OZ8B
1x9aBoIWcYgapHvfSXDxfF8EwtUAJ/I5+TigyVaavJHPOJBZjydIHihdpT8HyNuXICb/
dGMe+LZVF1WPegdZq8o551Il9hVwJoOaXhrP4CSUzwtqdKvmj91XMfwye/BEfYhJP2U5
iZRjO08C2XiTizJ3wmlSD0P6/5velRnM+wAAi/0SZPW/0JGEiEwAet7kgBd9WfVbpwHK
gE7cTXqBIr4pJ1b669OXzpL6sfaKPgONi4IEasEHh7UnMl6QpZpmiaN0SirYAQ7EoAgn
IdKg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXmB6jyOZl0CpV+lGUBJldmDTZD++1CGPCrdy8PepWPVkJtfFbU
QdQCx2BhDqgLrsTYoh/Hzq/x1A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwGlHESIo8RZ161HW3Ci1/fAa/nx67DpalSZ/asfwJvjRP+0B+uNx9Mh1K6rxvMDkCTLM+3nQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:b312:: with SMTP id
d18mr8689441pjr.35.1562376484899;
Fri, 05 Jul 2019 18:28:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:600:a080:16bb:cc2:2a58:54e6:f4ef?
([2601:600:a080:16bb:cc2:2a58:54e6:f4ef])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
1sm10109092pfe.102.2019.07.05.18.28.03
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Fri, 05 Jul 2019 18:28:04 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16F203)
In-Reply-To: <UyUISFwgh_-KtxpCJonltkqTvVbI9-NBukizE8tKSjB2V12otZiCWQ64sn8oqYk5NDftNHxW3koT9EPOWwVrOkXTP8Dqc-0W0wPGRK-wT34=@protonmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2019 18:28:03 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0851B842-34A1-427F-95DC-A1D6AB416FB9@voskuil.org>
References: <0DBC0DEA-C999-4AEE-B2E1-D5337ECD9405@gmail.com>
<A64C3DCB-10CE-45EA-9A1B-7E3D13DF90EA@gmail.com>
<6B9A04E2-8EEE-40A0-8B39-64AA0F478CAB@voskuil.org>
<SEQmsx6ck79biVthBbBk1b9r9-R45sBwqWrv3FewQIBl4J18sOlwAPRt8sbTIbrBB8DX538GfwQkU40lyODmEkGSwah_VmbXT8iOr2Jcjlw=@protonmail.com>
<F17F2E86-BFA4-456E-85F9-0D6583692AEC@voskuil.org>
<kSCa9KUmpJox2_aglqhel-WdGlXf14mfKNZ95T4xqsrkQJ2Zh5zFA-Llq-j9cXX87iEPP5_aCkO9oR5kfQGKMBK9ds3Jct1V1FAawwa4CyE=@protonmail.com>
<B853EDF2-8A8A-44B0-A66E-F86175E61EDA@voskuil.org>
<4mT6iC4Va7Afg15a5NLbddAnF2a_vAcQSXYr_jg_5IyEK2ezblJff7EJZakoqvp4BJlLitt9Zlq1_l5JadR0nVss7VDPW-pv8jXGh7lkFC4=@protonmail.com>
<A1ADD0BB-F62F-47AF-B043-53BDF3A88CC3@voskuil.org>
<UyUISFwgh_-KtxpCJonltkqTvVbI9-NBukizE8tKSjB2V12otZiCWQ64sn8oqYk5NDftNHxW3koT9EPOWwVrOkXTP8Dqc-0W0wPGRK-wT34=@protonmail.com>
To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 06 Jul 2019 01:34:57 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Generalized covenants with taproot enable
riskless or risky lending,
prevent credit inflation through fractional reserve
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2019 01:28:06 -0000
> On Jul 5, 2019, at 17:17, ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> Good morning Eric,
>=20
>> But it=E2=80=99s worth noting that early recovery of the UTXO entirely el=
iminates the value of the time lock cost to the ad market. The most obvious e=
xample is one encumbering the coin to himself, then releasing it with his ow=
n two signatures whenever he wants. In other words, there is no encumbrance a=
t all, just a bunch of pointless obscurantion.
>=20
> You still do not understand.
> I strongly suggest actually reading the post instead of skimming it.
I am responding to the cryptoeconomic principles, not the implementation det=
ails. Based on your comments here I am not misrepresenting those principles.=
For example, I have shown that the multisig unlock implementation reduces th=
e presumably-encumbered UTXO to simply a UTXO. You have not disputed that. I=
n fact below you have accepted it (more below).
> The advertisement is broadcast to new nodes on the ad network if and only i=
f its backing UTXO remains unspent.
> Once the UTXO is spent, then the advertisement is considered no longer val=
id and will be outright deleted by existing nodes, and new nodes will not le=
arn of them (and would consider it spam if it is forced to them when the UTX=
O is already spent, possibly banning the node that pushes the advertisement a=
t them).
>=20
> Thus the locked-ness of the UTXO is the lifetime of the advertisement.
The term =E2=80=9Clocked=E2=80=9D here is misused. A unspent output that can=
be spent at any time is just an unspent output. The fact that you can =E2=80=
=9Cunencumber=E2=80=9D your own coins should make this exceedingly obvious:
> Once you disencumber the coins (whether your own, or rented) then your adv=
ertisement is gone; forever.
As I have shown, there is no *actual* encumbrance.
> Your advertisement exists only as long as the UTXO is unspent.
Exactly, which implies *any* UTXO is sufficient. All that the ad network req=
uires is proof of ownership of any UTXO.
Unspentness is not actually a necessary cost (expense). All coin is always r=
epresented as UTXOs. If one has a hoard of coin there is no necessary increm=
ental cost of identifying those coins to =E2=80=9Cback=E2=80=9D ads.This isn=
=E2=80=99t altered by the proposed design.
The only cost would be to have a hoard that one does not otherwise desire, r=
epresenting an opportunity cost. Yet, as I have also pointed out, the amount=
of that opportunity cost can simply be spent (or burned) by the advertiser,=
representing the same cost. So covering the case where one cannot raise the=
capital to =E2=80=9Cback=E2=80=9D one=E2=80=99s ad does not require rental,=
as the cost of the otherwise rental can just be spent outright.
Presumably it would be ideal to transfer the value of those spends to people=
who provably present the ads for effective viewing (i.e., the AdWords busin=
ess model). It is of course this market-driven cost of presenting an ad that=
provides the spam protection/definition for AdWords.
Best,
Eric
> Regards.
> ZmnSCPxj
|
