summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/3e
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorVenzen Khaosan <venzen@mail.bihthai.net>2015-06-27 17:19:55 +0700
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2015-06-27 10:20:04 +0000
commitf3043e065472b10f78565b6e11d17d7be2ca5b03 (patch)
treecf2610cbfd96050c752b446d270218d0b3382a88 /3e
parent158f465f580e503d64a149bdf265b3ce2512fb9f (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-f3043e065472b10f78565b6e11d17d7be2ca5b03.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-f3043e065472b10f78565b6e11d17d7be2ca5b03.zip
Re: [bitcoin-dev] The need for larger blocks
Diffstat (limited to '3e')
-rw-r--r--3e/17305f22140b716b5c59b7344a8c05d3b5380a142
1 files changed, 142 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/3e/17305f22140b716b5c59b7344a8c05d3b5380a b/3e/17305f22140b716b5c59b7344a8c05d3b5380a
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..887ef9467
--- /dev/null
+++ b/3e/17305f22140b716b5c59b7344a8c05d3b5380a
@@ -0,0 +1,142 @@
+Return-Path: <venzen@mail.bihthai.net>
+Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
+ [172.17.192.35])
+ by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16331BB3
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sat, 27 Jun 2015 10:20:04 +0000 (UTC)
+X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
+Received: from mail.bihthai.net (unknown [5.255.87.165])
+ by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 640EA121
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sat, 27 Jun 2015 10:20:03 +0000 (UTC)
+Received: from [10.8.0.6] (unknown [10.8.0.6])
+ (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
+ (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: venzen)
+ by mail.bihthai.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6D6B92038C;
+ Sat, 27 Jun 2015 12:20:38 +0200 (CEST)
+Message-ID: <558E78CB.7070207@mail.bihthai.net>
+Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 17:19:55 +0700
+From: Venzen Khaosan <venzen@mail.bihthai.net>
+Organization: Bihthai Bai Mai
+User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
+ rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+To: NxtChg <nxtchg@hush.com>, bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+References: <CAPg+sBjOj9eXiDG0F6G54SVKkStF_1HRu2wzGqtFF5X_NAWy4w@mail.gmail.com> <20150627074259.GA25420@amethyst.visucore.com>
+ <20150627095501.C59B541A40@smtp.hushmail.com>
+In-Reply-To: <20150627095501.C59B541A40@smtp.hushmail.com>
+OpenPGP: id=1CF07D66;
+ url=pool.sks-keyservers.net
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RDNS_NONE
+ autolearn=no version=3.3.1
+X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
+ smtp1.linux-foundation.org
+Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] The need for larger blocks
+X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
+Precedence: list
+Reply-To: venzen@mail.bihthai.net
+List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
+List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
+List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
+List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
+X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 10:20:04 -0000
+
+-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
+Hash: SHA1
+
+
+Advocations of "formalizing the process" may have a good outcome, but
+that is not the issue in the current dilemma. The present process is
+good enough. And that's as much as we can hope for.
+
+The issue is: does Bitcoin need to scale to business or does business
+need to scale to Bitcoin.
+
+Business is not the Holy Spirit that fills Bitcoin with utility.
+Bitcoin already has utility and finance capital would like to ride
+that utility for its own profit motive. Some posters, here in this
+list, would like to accelerate that process and they justify their
+argument with the assumption that greater adoption equals greater
+utility and value (and price).
+
+That is a false assumption. Given the increased adoption of Bitcoin by
+users and businesses during the past year, does the price chart
+reflect greater value or price? Of course not, the price chart is at
+terminal lows. Fact not fiction.
+
+It is a fiction of common "market wisdom" that greater adoption
+increases a commodity's value. Speculation plays with commodity value
+even when underlying fundamental value remains unchanged. China has
+verifiably been purchasing record amounts of Gold, but there is no
+effect in the price chart (or on Gold's objective value).
+
+Bitcoin's price chart will go up and down many times in the coming
+years as speculators play their game. It's independent of the
+underlying censorship resistance, mathematical consensus and
+transaction security of Bitcoin. Once the decentralization is
+sacrificed to big business then you can expect the final price chart low.
+
+Until then, let's hold our horses and maintain an even keel: Bitcoin
+is not trying to fit into the manic global economy's race toward the
+edge of a precipice - Bitcoin is the solution once its all gone wrong
+- - for ordinary users, not opportunistic bank-based business models
+such as JPMorgan, Pantera Capital or BTC-China.
+
+If you cannot see the inherent centralization problem with most
+so-called Bitcoin businesses you just haven't done your homework.
+
+
+
+
+On 06/27/2015 04:55 PM, NxtChg wrote:
+>
+> On 6/27/2015 at 10:43 AM, "Wladimir J. van der Laan"
+> <laanwj@gmail.com> wrote:
+>
+>> It has been disappointing and scary to see political pressure
+>> tactics being used to change a distributed consensus system.
+>
+> That's why some people are advocating formalizing the process.
+> Political pressure will happen anyway, whether somebody likes it or
+> not. It's better to deal with it in the open.
+>
+>
+>> They cannot be changed willy-nilly according to needs of some
+>> groups, much less than lower gravity can be legislated to help
+>> the airline industry.
+>
+> Except the block size is not gravity. It's more like an arbitrary
+> decision to limit planes' wingspan to the most typical hangar door
+> of 1940.
+>
+> And now we have a "controversy" that we can't have modern planes
+> out of the fear they won't fit into some of the old hangars.
+>
+> And to continue with this nice example, some people are even
+> arguing that "the demand for flight is, essentially, limitless, so
+> why bother making larger jets at all?"
+>
+>
+> _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing
+> list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
+>
+-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
+Version: GnuPG v1
+
+iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVjnjHAAoJEGwAhlQc8H1m7CMH/273H3C7tnL56jJZ6U9RMbSN
+dp2dPLusMJAvjWKiM/P5VjbcXnvARFuA3foIkzlxGdt2mvGlddW+b2x9YVZcDAZz
+k9V/IccOmVVEvIpfaP0Awe6H9H8+Gr1PpFWuaFExcem9T9bF6kVGV4o0g6EGzwVe
+rGJb0radm2qdWTKvUNvjXAF3kGRtoewFmTZBwyE6R6AxE7tvs/4Zvsf99+EQsD+o
+3NZFlXX0gvPmaR7TWK0iOGlgns9MmKMm94xk8lHkESvW0NCMwTw6I0Pz74usPDte
+U0lWkZBoKFWkEuf6ChVOOoSdSbYFrOwa0uaiJtPWJB+9TiwZdZbDJumW3uqYG5M=
+=4vVg
+-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
+