đź“… Original date posted:2017-10-10
đź“ť Original message:I think this response speaks for itself.
On 10/10/2017 10:09 AM, Tao Effect wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> I thought it was clear, but apparently you are getting stuck on the
> semantics of the word "burn".
>
> The "burning" applies to the original coins you had.
>
> When you transfer them back, you get newly minted coins, equivalent to
> the amount you "burned" on the chain you're transferring from — as
> stated in the OP.
>
> If you don't like the word "burn", pick another one.
>
> --
> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also
> sharing with the NSA.
>
>> On Oct 10, 2017, at 4:20 AM, Paul Sztorc <truthcoin at gmail.com
>> <mailto:truthcoin at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Haha, no. Because you "burned" the coins.
>>
>> On Oct 10, 2017 1:20 AM, "Tao Effect" <contact at taoeffect.com
>> <mailto:contact at taoeffect.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Paul,
>>
>> It's a two-way peg.
>>
>> There's nothing preventing transfers back to the main chain.
>>
>> They work in the exact same manner.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Greg
>>
>> --
>> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also
>> sharing with the NSA.
>>
>>> On Oct 9, 2017, at 6:39 PM, Paul Sztorc <truthcoin at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:truthcoin at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> That is only a one-way peg, not a two-way.
>>>
>>> In fact, that is exactly what drivechain does, if one chooses
>>> parameters for the drivechain that make it impossible for any
>>> side-to-main transfer to succeed.
>>>
>>> One-way pegs have strong first-mover disadvantages.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> On Oct 9, 2017 9:24 PM, "Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev"
>>> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>> <mailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear list,
>>>
>>> In previous arguments over Drivechain (and Drivechain-like
>>> proposals) I promised that better scaling proposals — that
>>> do not sacrifice Bitcoin's security — would come along.
>>>
>>> I planned to do a detailed writeup, but have decided to just
>>> send off this email with what I have, because I'm unlikely
>>> to have time to write up a detailed proposal.
>>>
>>> The idea is very simple (and by no means novel*), and I'm
>>> sure others have mentioned either exactly it, or similar
>>> ideas (e.g. burning coins) before.
>>>
>>> This is a generic sharding protocol for all blockchains,
>>> including Bitcoin.
>>>
>>> Users simply say: "My coins on Chain A are going to be sent
>>> to Chain B".
>>>
>>> Then they burn the coins on Chain A, and create a minting
>>> transaction on Chain B. The details of how to ensure that
>>> coins do not get lost needs to be worked out, but I'm fairly
>>> certain the folks on this list can figure out those details.
>>>
>>> - Thin clients, nodes, and miners, can all very easily
>>> verify that said action took place, and therefore accept the
>>> "newly minted" coins on B as valid.
>>> - Users client software now also knows where to look for the
>>> other coins (if for some reason it needs to).
>>>
>>> This doesn't even need much modification to the Bitcoin
>>> protocol as most of the verification is done client-side.
>>>
>>> It is fully decentralized, and there's no need to give our
>>> ownership of our coins to miners to get scale.
>>>
>>> My sincere apologies if this has been brought up before (in
>>> which case, I would be very grateful for a link to the
>>> proposal).
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Greg Slepak
>>>
>>> * This idea is similar in spirit to Interledger.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable
>>> also sharing with the NSA.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>>> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>> <mailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>> <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>;
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20171010/0bebbbfd/attachment-0001.html>;
Paul Sztorc [ARCHIVE] /
npub10t…w9uu9
2023-06-07 18:07:01
in reply to nevent1q…n8wl
Author Public Key
npub10tqt6wdc2neye0cxwyphtre6n5uccgur94khtqjdry9wxhrvywlq6w9uu9Published at
2023-06-07 18:07:01Event JSON
{
"id": "dd50a2aff11a7ffad98f7d20122d28ad93f01192101cb37df618a61d9c1d706b",
"pubkey": "7ac0bd39b854f24cbf067103758f3a9d398c23832d6d75824d190ae35c6c23be",
"created_at": 1686161221,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"fd580ac0183fd4c89c8d00875bacd50db237c5eb014e289c09c9a01a5d7dc865",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"0fbaae2ceb2a9f10850d5f6796c6f7383b7db3420df24047c670953159c78b65",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"1bd05a5503fb6854f03714081df3970b79306bc9f28bd4ec35add5b3317755d7"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-10-10\n📝 Original message:I think this response speaks for itself.\n\nOn 10/10/2017 10:09 AM, Tao Effect wrote:\n\u003e Hi Paul,\n\u003e\n\u003e I thought it was clear, but apparently you are getting stuck on the\n\u003e semantics of the word \"burn\".\n\u003e\n\u003e The \"burning\" applies to the original coins you had.\n\u003e\n\u003e When you transfer them back, you get newly minted coins, equivalent to\n\u003e the amount you \"burned\" on the chain you're transferring from — as\n\u003e stated in the OP.\n\u003e\n\u003e If you don't like the word \"burn\", pick another one.\n\u003e\n\u003e --\n\u003e Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also\n\u003e sharing with the NSA.\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e On Oct 10, 2017, at 4:20 AM, Paul Sztorc \u003ctruthcoin at gmail.com\n\u003e\u003e \u003cmailto:truthcoin at gmail.com\u003e\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Haha, no. Because you \"burned\" the coins.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e On Oct 10, 2017 1:20 AM, \"Tao Effect\" \u003ccontact at taoeffect.com\n\u003e\u003e \u003cmailto:contact at taoeffect.com\u003e\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Paul,\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e It's a two-way peg.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e There's nothing preventing transfers back to the main chain.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e They work in the exact same manner.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Cheers,\n\u003e\u003e Greg\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e --\n\u003e\u003e Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also\n\u003e\u003e sharing with the NSA.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e On Oct 9, 2017, at 6:39 PM, Paul Sztorc \u003ctruthcoin at gmail.com\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003cmailto:truthcoin at gmail.com\u003e\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e That is only a one-way peg, not a two-way.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e In fact, that is exactly what drivechain does, if one chooses\n\u003e\u003e\u003e parameters for the drivechain that make it impossible for any\n\u003e\u003e\u003e side-to-main transfer to succeed.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e One-way pegs have strong first-mover disadvantages.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Paul\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e On Oct 9, 2017 9:24 PM, \"Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev\"\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003cmailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Dear list,\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e In previous arguments over Drivechain (and Drivechain-like\n\u003e\u003e\u003e proposals) I promised that better scaling proposals — that\n\u003e\u003e\u003e do not sacrifice Bitcoin's security — would come along.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e I planned to do a detailed writeup, but have decided to just\n\u003e\u003e\u003e send off this email with what I have, because I'm unlikely\n\u003e\u003e\u003e to have time to write up a detailed proposal.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e The idea is very simple (and by no means novel*), and I'm\n\u003e\u003e\u003e sure others have mentioned either exactly it, or similar\n\u003e\u003e\u003e ideas (e.g. burning coins) before.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e This is a generic sharding protocol for all blockchains,\n\u003e\u003e\u003e including Bitcoin.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Users simply say: \"My coins on Chain A are going to be sent\n\u003e\u003e\u003e to Chain B\".\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Then they burn the coins on Chain A, and create a minting\n\u003e\u003e\u003e transaction on Chain B. The details of how to ensure that\n\u003e\u003e\u003e coins do not get lost needs to be worked out, but I'm fairly\n\u003e\u003e\u003e certain the folks on this list can figure out those details.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e - Thin clients, nodes, and miners, can all very easily\n\u003e\u003e\u003e verify that said action took place, and therefore accept the\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \"newly minted\" coins on B as valid.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e - Users client software now also knows where to look for the\n\u003e\u003e\u003e other coins (if for some reason it needs to).\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e This doesn't even need much modification to the Bitcoin\n\u003e\u003e\u003e protocol as most of the verification is done client-side.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e It is fully decentralized, and there's no need to give our\n\u003e\u003e\u003e ownership of our coins to miners to get scale.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e My sincere apologies if this has been brought up before (in\n\u003e\u003e\u003e which case, I would be very grateful for a link to the\n\u003e\u003e\u003e proposal).\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Cheers,\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Greg Slepak\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e * This idea is similar in spirit to Interledger.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e --\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable\n\u003e\u003e\u003e also sharing with the NSA.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e\u003e\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e\u003e\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003cmailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003chttps://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20171010/0bebbbfd/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "21bcbb2baae3eb3bf175d13e1a06464b36663b90607ff2474a32ba2b9023d2a286611ce59356f6db3803b834506622abc8d6574a82fcc470531688f791d6ad54"
}