Quote from: tvbcof on March 23, 2015, 02:45:46 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on March 23, 2015, 02:20:35 AM

that's assuming you or anyone else has the ability to determine whether or not a UTXO has 100% cleanliness. i'd say it depends on who is doing the analysis. you yourself admitted, after i pointed it out, that you might indeed have stolen coins from allinvain in your wallet. should we lock down your coins?

- grandfather all UTXO at a point in time.
- validate UTXOs from then forward by the simple metric: 'do we know who is responsible for them?'

there you go again with the socialist attitude. "just make it so" says you. care to tell me how all gvts worldwide will coordinate this simple action? and tell us how you would tell "who is responsibel for them"? wake me up when they do and maybe i'll pay attention to your FUD. and even if they do, i see no discussion from you as to how to practically implement your pronouncements.

Quote

This is as simple as the filter for general cryptography which we are likely to see:

- packet has a govt back-door?

These things are really very simple. If you want to sooth yourself by imagine them as complex, suit yourself, but don't whine and bitch when you lose your ass.

this is just you being a pessimist again. you really do think the gvt is all powerful, don't you?

Quote

Quote from: cypherdoc on March 23, 2015, 02:20:35 AM

if it's so trivial, tell us how splitting out UTXO's works technically. wallet software follows a particular logic of UTXO selection when assembling for a specific tx which i've not been able to get a good sense of and i'm sure you haven't either. there's no such thing as "UTXO control" like there is "coin control" for addresses, afaik. tell us how you would construct a tx to select or exclude certain UTXO's that you'd deem tainted. from what i do know, the wallets select the most suitably "sized" UTXO's which when combined together fits the tx amount so as to minimize splitting and efficiently packages the tx at the least cost in terms of fees and data requirements. furthermore, for a UTXO that has 0.15% "taint", tell us how you'd split that out practically. stop pretending that Coinbase has a way to do this when you don't know that.

Formulating a spend from select UTXO's is a _very_ simple problem. It's not often needed these days (though it's been done to try to deal with the dust problem) but it's uncommon because it is not very useful rather than because it is difficult.

the dust problem was not dealt with via filtering UTXO's. it was dealt with by increasing the tx fee.

Quote

As for identifying a UTXO as validated or not (to decide whether to spend it) that is not possible because there is no validation service at present. Here again, it does not mean that it is a difficult problem.

Alex Waters has figured out it won't work. you should too.

Quote

I do suggest that you brush up on how to formulate transactions from abstract UTXO's in a desired way before the USGavincoin alt is pushed out. You can thank me later.

why don't you spare us all some time and tell us how you would technically separate out taint from a set of UTXO's with varying percentages of taint all within the same address? not only that, but tell us how you would make it practical and easy for avg Bitcoiners to comply with your law?