📅 Original date posted:2019-07-02
📝 Original message:Hello ZmnSCPxj,
To be more precise, the value of the UTXO is severaly damaged that it is governed by rules of a de-facto side chain with different rules.
Therefore its value to those renting it from the advertizer is just that of the advertizement, which is not neccesarily following the opportunity cost.
The covenant supported temporary access is transitive, therefore anyone who is in temporary control of an UTXO can recover its cost by sub-renting.
The opportunity (riskless) interest provides a baseline of value on top of which you may have utility that is the advertizement.
Regards,
Tamas Blummer
> On Jul 2, 2019, at 11:30, Tamas Blummer <tamas.blummer at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello ZmnSCPxj,
>
>> On Jul 2, 2019, at 10:12, ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj at protonmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> As a counterargument, I observe that committing to the advertisement on the UTXO is similar to committing to a SCRIPT on a UTXO.
>> And I observe the Graftroot idea, wherein we commit to a public key on the UTXO, and admit a SCRIPT that is signed by the public key as a SCRIPT that unlocks the UTXO for spending.
>>
>> By analogy, in my "advertising" scheme, instead of committing the advertisement on the UTXO, I can instead commit a public key (for example, the hash of the "advertiser pubkey" is used to tweak the onchain public key).
>> Then we use this advertiser pubkey to admit advertisements on the advertising network.
>>
>> This advertiser pubkey is used to sign an "advertisement chain", which is a merklized singly-linked list whose contents are the actual advertisements, each node being signed using the advertiser pubkey.
>> To ensure that the advertiser does not sign multiple versions of this chain, we can have the signing nonce be derived from the height of the advertchain, such that signing the same height multiple times leads to private key revelation.
>
> The advertiser would thereby put the funds of the HODLer on risk of his misbehavior, which means the HODLer would have to trust the advertizing service.
> This is not the trustless separation the covenant achives.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tamas Blummer
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20190702/46768c00/attachment.sig>;
Tamas Blummer [ARCHIVE] /
npub1cc…ex8m8
2023-06-07 18:19:05
in reply to nevent1q…24rn
Author Public Key
npub1ccegg9n9lnx6huppxg43m95488yur7pfemkn3pz0agjws5ffvtts0ex8m8Published at
2023-06-07 18:19:05Event JSON
{
"id": "4dadbbb3cadbc8d1c90df791c37bd3f1835cf64e5eb011357c610de008e3fc50",
"pubkey": "c632841665fccdabf021322b1d969539c9c1f829ceed38844fea24e8512962d7",
"created_at": 1686161945,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"3c9e48adf555bcb684b7db89a8331285e9e31548be31a167a1f1d6aff4b3cbf3",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"6d8be56223d1fae54fd770cef8eb7db353887e7edd680d7dd52aa799d7e8e4f8",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"c632841665fccdabf021322b1d969539c9c1f829ceed38844fea24e8512962d7"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2019-07-02\n📝 Original message:Hello ZmnSCPxj,\n\nTo be more precise, the value of the UTXO is severaly damaged that it is governed by rules of a de-facto side chain with different rules.\nTherefore its value to those renting it from the advertizer is just that of the advertizement, which is not neccesarily following the opportunity cost.\n\nThe covenant supported temporary access is transitive, therefore anyone who is in temporary control of an UTXO can recover its cost by sub-renting.\nThe opportunity (riskless) interest provides a baseline of value on top of which you may have utility that is the advertizement.\n\nRegards,\n\nTamas Blummer\n\n\u003e On Jul 2, 2019, at 11:30, Tamas Blummer \u003ctamas.blummer at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e Hello ZmnSCPxj,\n\u003e \n\u003e\u003e On Jul 2, 2019, at 10:12, ZmnSCPxj \u003cZmnSCPxj at protonmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e As a counterargument, I observe that committing to the advertisement on the UTXO is similar to committing to a SCRIPT on a UTXO.\n\u003e\u003e And I observe the Graftroot idea, wherein we commit to a public key on the UTXO, and admit a SCRIPT that is signed by the public key as a SCRIPT that unlocks the UTXO for spending.\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e By analogy, in my \"advertising\" scheme, instead of committing the advertisement on the UTXO, I can instead commit a public key (for example, the hash of the \"advertiser pubkey\" is used to tweak the onchain public key).\n\u003e\u003e Then we use this advertiser pubkey to admit advertisements on the advertising network.\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e This advertiser pubkey is used to sign an \"advertisement chain\", which is a merklized singly-linked list whose contents are the actual advertisements, each node being signed using the advertiser pubkey.\n\u003e\u003e To ensure that the advertiser does not sign multiple versions of this chain, we can have the signing nonce be derived from the height of the advertchain, such that signing the same height multiple times leads to private key revelation.\n\u003e \n\u003e The advertiser would thereby put the funds of the HODLer on risk of his misbehavior, which means the HODLer would have to trust the advertizing service.\n\u003e This is not the trustless separation the covenant achives.\n\u003e \n\u003e Regards,\n\u003e \n\u003e Tamas Blummer\n\u003e \n\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 488 bytes\nDesc: Message signed with OpenPGP\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20190702/46768c00/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "4b267d07d48bae7eb42186a213ce9b9d9570820848cc5ef9cacf3e72b6841daab6f308b6bd630107d6777d3639146f6053b400db8132f05c9a2102dd29ad4155"
}