{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1kf0ppcjaguxekg24yx6smgxlu73qn0k8lm0t2wrqc0scpl7u3sgsmf3f58","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1kf0ppcjaguxekg24yx6smgxlu73qn0k8lm0t2wrqc0scpl7u3sgsmf3f58","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-12-20\n📝 Original message:On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 6:24 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e What I proprosed is that a consensus-critical maximum UTXO age be part\n\u003e of the protocol; UTXO's younger than that age are expected to be cached.\n\u003e For UTXO's older than that age, they can be dropped from the cache,\n\u003e however to spend them you are required to provide the proof, and that\n\u003e proof counts as blockchain space to account for the fact that they do\n\u003e need to be broadcast on the network.\n\n\nYes, this is almost what -has- to happen in the long term.\n\nIdeally we should start having wallets generate those proofs now, and then\nintroduce the max-age as a second step as a planned hard fork a couple\nyears down the line.\n\nHowever,\n1) There is also the open question of \"grandfathered\" UTXOs - for those\nwallets generated in 2009, buried in a landfill and then dug out 10 years\nago\n\n2) This reverses the useful minimization attribute of HD wallets - \"just\nbackup the seed\"\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151220/849d17b4/attachment.html\u003e"}