[Bitcoin-development] Setting the record straight on Proof-of-Publication

2014-12-12 Thread Peter Todd
Introduction While not a new concept proof-of-publication is receiving a significant amount of attention right now both as an idea, with regard to the embedded consensus systems that make use of it, and in regard to the sidechains model proposed by Blockstream that rejects it. Here

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Setting the record straight on Proof-of-Publication

2014-12-12 Thread Gareth Williams
On 12/12/14 20:05, Peter Todd wrote: Secondly using a limited-supply token in a proof-of-publicaton system is what lets you have secure client side validation rather than the alternative of 2-way-pegging that requires users to trust miners not to steal the pegged funds. Secure and client

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Setting the record straight on Proof-of-Publication

2014-12-12 Thread odinn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Peter... It kind of sounds to me that (as fine of a position paper as this is) on _certain_ points, you're falling prey to the but it's inefficient, but it's a scamcoin, but luke-jr told me so argument... I think the Mastercoin devs are doing fine

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Setting the record straight on Proof-of-Publication

2014-12-12 Thread Justus Ranvier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 12/12/2014 01:41 PM, odinn wrote: I think the Mastercoin devs are doing fine work I wonder if all the Mastercoin devs would agree with that statement. - -- Support online privacy by using email encryption whenever possible. Learn how here:

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Setting the record straight on Proof-of-Publication

2014-12-12 Thread Alex Mizrahi
Secure and client side validation don't really belong in the same sentence, do they? Well, client-side validation is mathematically secure, while SPV is economically secure. I.e. it is secure if you make several assumptions about economics of the whole thing. In my opinion the former is

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Setting the record straight on Proof-of-Publication

2014-12-12 Thread Alex Mizrahi
I think what Gareth was getting at was that with client-side validation there can be no concept of a soft-fork. And how certain are you that the consensus rules will never change? Yes, it is true that you can't do a soft-fork, but you can do a hard-fork. Using scheduled updates: client simply

[Bitcoin-development] Near-zero fee transactions with hub-and-spoke micropayments

2014-12-12 Thread Peter Todd
From the So-Obvious-No-one-Has-Bothered-to-Write-It-Down-Department: tl;dr: Micropayment channels can be extended to arbitrary numbers of parties using a nearly completley untrusted hub, greatly decreasing transaction fees and greatly increasing the maximum number of financial transactions per