Quote from: ghgr on September 11, 2013, 09:05:27 AM

That's a neat idea (mixing large transactions) but unfortunately I cannot see how it could be implemented. When signing an input we sign a hash of the outputs, and thus adding new outputs will require to re-sign the transaction (as you already stated).
So, the transaction must go back and fort (in order to resign it each time an output is added) and the miner becomes essentially the rendez-vous server.

That isn't the case, and if you see the "taint rich" link in the post, you can see I went and performed these transactions with people with no back and forth, there is a single round trip: I offer inputs and outputs, you respond with inputs and outputs and your signature, I then add my signature. If you'd like we can do one together too.

My main motivation in creating that long writeup was correcting that misconception. For SIGHASH_ALL these can be accomplished by simply agreeing on the outputs before any signing begins. (Obviously things are even simpler with SIGHASH_SINGLE, but that doesn't have the desirable privacy properties).

Quote from: Edward. on September 11, 2013, 01:55:08 AM

Standardize some coin denominations, call 'minted coin'.

I tried pretty hard a couple years ago to get pools to round up their payments to non-jagged numbers like 0.01, because the highly jagged outputs they produce are bad for privacy and produce more bloaty change... and had absolutely zero luck. I am not anticipating great success on any kind of denominationalizing bitcoin. Maybe if the block explorers that give the misleading "account" view go away and people use more clients that show a more accurate "coin" view people will start to care more about the denomination of the coins they receive.