Re: [Bitcoin-development] bitcoin taint unilateral revocability (Re: ecash and revocability)

2013-05-14 Thread Simon Barber
Adam, Take a look at this privacy enhancing solution based on fair exchange implemented by bitcoin contracts and cut-and-choose. It would require a public pool of users willing to exchange in common denominations at moments in time together to ensure unlinkability. It also leave a trace of

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: Service bits for pruned nodes

2013-04-30 Thread Simon Barber
And then the problem of what domain name to use - ideally a single name would be used so caches had the maximum chance to reuse content. To keep the network distributed perhaps the existing DNS seed mechanism could be used - a few names, each serving a random bitcoind's address. Put :8333

Re: [Bitcoin-development] New P2P commands for diagnostics, SPV clients

2012-06-15 Thread Simon Barber
separate filterinit / filterload - so you can do a new filterload later on if your list changes, without the privacy implications of filteradd. Simon On Thu 14 Jun 2012 04:52:29 AM PDT, Mike Hearn wrote: filterinit(false positive rate, number of elements): initialize filterload(data): input

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Determine input addresses of a transaction

2011-10-24 Thread Simon Barber
PKI would avoid the need for the trust aggregator to be consulted for each transaction. Obviously checking for revocation would be essential. The CA cert can state what kind of guarantee is available. Simon On 10/24/2011 09:25 AM, Mike Hearn wrote: You know, just thinking out loud...