📅 Original date posted:2013-03-12
📝 Original message:On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 11:31:55PM -0500, Peter Todd wrote:
> As discussed endlessly data in the UTXO set is more costly, especially
> in the long run, than transaction data itself. The fee system is per KB
> in a block, and thus doesn't properly capture the long-term costs of
> UTXO creation.
There's been a lot of discussion about this issue, and many people have
asked that Bitcoin not arbitrarily block interesting potential uses of
provably unspendable txouts for data applications, and similarly
spendable txouts representing assets. I've changed my hardline position
and now think we should support all that stuff. However, there is one
remaining class of txout not yet talked about, unspendable but not
provably so txouts. For instance we could make the following a standard
transaction type:
scriptPubKey: OP_HASH160 <20 byte digest> OP_EQUALVERIFY <data>
scriptSig: <data>
Of course, usually the 20 byte digest would be picked randomly, but it
might not be, and thus all validating nodes will always have a copy of
the data. With the 10KB limit on script sizes you can fit 9974 bytes of
data per transaction output with very little waste.
A good application is timestamping, with the advantage over
coinbase/merkle tree systems in that you don't have to wait until your
timestamp confirms, or even store the timestamp at all. Another
application, quite possible with large block sizes and hence cheap or
free transactions, is secure data backups. In particular such a service,
perhaps called Google Chain Storage, can offer the unique guarantee that
you can know you're data is secure by simply performing a successful
Bitcoin transaction.
--
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20130312/10b7fde5/attachment.sig>;
Peter Todd [ARCHIVE] /
npub1m2…a2np2
2023-06-07 11:35:55
in reply to nevent1q…wnte
Author Public Key
npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2Published at
2023-06-07 11:35:55Event JSON
{
"id": "f713ca9b14a2291a31c4ff5e0b59ab513fee257cf85eafb5c53a63c842c4b813",
"pubkey": "daa2fc676a25e3b5b45644540bcbd1e1168b111427cd0e3cf19c56194fb231aa",
"created_at": 1686137755,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ac08c1a6c33933128b534f22efee5bb15c3746d60deefafe520b9c4fff7b646d",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"e56355b5dc2ad3834ee90be968a0388495d716dc22055d641f352e4074142ebc",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"9e3c76fd7eb862ca37f150391debc7baa4f8423eaa3f894c476a7d4360de9a02"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2013-03-12\n📝 Original message:On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 11:31:55PM -0500, Peter Todd wrote:\n\u003e As discussed endlessly data in the UTXO set is more costly, especially\n\u003e in the long run, than transaction data itself. The fee system is per KB\n\u003e in a block, and thus doesn't properly capture the long-term costs of\n\u003e UTXO creation.\n\nThere's been a lot of discussion about this issue, and many people have\nasked that Bitcoin not arbitrarily block interesting potential uses of\nprovably unspendable txouts for data applications, and similarly\nspendable txouts representing assets. I've changed my hardline position\nand now think we should support all that stuff. However, there is one\nremaining class of txout not yet talked about, unspendable but not\nprovably so txouts. For instance we could make the following a standard\ntransaction type:\n\nscriptPubKey: OP_HASH160 \u003c20 byte digest\u003e OP_EQUALVERIFY \u003cdata\u003e\nscriptSig: \u003cdata\u003e\n\nOf course, usually the 20 byte digest would be picked randomly, but it\nmight not be, and thus all validating nodes will always have a copy of\nthe data. With the 10KB limit on script sizes you can fit 9974 bytes of\ndata per transaction output with very little waste.\n\nA good application is timestamping, with the advantage over\ncoinbase/merkle tree systems in that you don't have to wait until your\ntimestamp confirms, or even store the timestamp at all. Another\napplication, quite possible with large block sizes and hence cheap or\nfree transactions, is secure data backups. In particular such a service,\nperhaps called Google Chain Storage, can offer the unique guarantee that\nyou can know you're data is secure by simply performing a successful\nBitcoin transaction.\n\n-- \n'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 490 bytes\nDesc: Digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20130312/10b7fde5/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "d782b6c1d9be2530b9cc21d060cb3c09822245a1f1f062a0387bcc2b1220cfb8cc43af90176eeaa0212a674c51a85e6b17bb767a5a11dd7119b67a033071bdf1"
}