diff options
| author | Ken Friece <kfriece@gmail.com> | 2015-08-19 08:24:28 -0400 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-08-19 12:24:30 +0000 |
| commit | 19c4f78bc9f08251f422ab3c82ccd249cc3e1c1d (patch) | |
| tree | 4e1e39d52853b4c5104e28e836f47ce8c0390fd9 | |
| parent | b57f0071469088758b5d2da661a2a8e0bf45a6ff (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-19c4f78bc9f08251f422ab3c82ccd249cc3e1c1d.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-19c4f78bc9f08251f422ab3c82ccd249cc3e1c1d.zip | |
[bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core versus XT observations
| -rw-r--r-- | a4/35bf2004b863a22b8a135b4fa6b65f5ac0426b | 126 |
1 files changed, 126 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/a4/35bf2004b863a22b8a135b4fa6b65f5ac0426b b/a4/35bf2004b863a22b8a135b4fa6b65f5ac0426b new file mode 100644 index 000000000..fbd6560bc --- /dev/null +++ b/a4/35bf2004b863a22b8a135b4fa6b65f5ac0426b @@ -0,0 +1,126 @@ +Return-Path: <kfriece@gmail.com> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADF4D910 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Wed, 19 Aug 2015 12:24:30 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from mail-la0-f47.google.com (mail-la0-f47.google.com + [209.85.215.47]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFBDD1DA + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Wed, 19 Aug 2015 12:24:29 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by lalv9 with SMTP id v9so1863553lal.0 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Wed, 19 Aug 2015 05:24:28 -0700 (PDT) +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; + h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; + bh=GJAtsNjdq2IjkpqdbyNYuo0AmYO8LVhHqVdZMRkpuUQ=; + b=fZdifgosBIKCghZM8P/ZUEQC16avXkojpFMJMDLI4cszG23zcgNBd+8h4xGkRDOWCt + EuuoOJSOiTdmIz41LYgCV3rzHzY/qHyt+fjnRP7jPqo8DhdUJ29RHiK6dHoH7mwWaoOX + scBTsgPghSfWKV65ACurc5rDMZoCIitASCWJRiohVA9KNqGByTRkrWINXfVIlSyYE0jx + usokMF+oDWknFYqXklaBDjZU0LSH12xbfdAtOagYAuS02ilMYVaRySuuU20Ty7BuCNiB + P2U9DhpAPz6ic2Sk8JCxJgDme6I+dGXLsbSqS6h/OIYs/RBpybE59zvWrYssfrfuyJNl + 5Kgw== +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Received: by 10.112.13.166 with SMTP id i6mr11027019lbc.50.1439987068246; + Wed, 19 Aug 2015 05:24:28 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.25.62.147 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 05:24:28 -0700 (PDT) +Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:24:28 -0400 +Message-ID: <CAKujSOHGPTy-A3TUKKxO4kJYhWaReqyni2aE0CvK0ON8tixNNw@mail.gmail.com> +From: Ken Friece <kfriece@gmail.com> +To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3c9b6af21fd051da91d30 +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,DKIM_SIGNED, + DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW + autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on + smtp1.linux-foundation.org +Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core versus XT observations +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 +Precedence: list +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: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 12:24:30 -0000 + +--001a11c3c9b6af21fd051da91d30 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 + +1.) Most people are running XT as a vote for bigger blocks and not because +they specifically support BIP101. If Core supported bigger blocks, most XT +users would switch back to Core and XT would die. + +2.) In this high stakes game of poker, XT just went all in, but Core still +has the far better hand. There are many, many scaling solutions Core could +adopt that would appease XT users enough to kill XT. Don't let perfect be +the enemy of good. The real question is whether or not anyone can provide +enough Core leadership to reach "consensus". The longer it takes for Core +to reach "consensus", the stronger XT gets. + +3.) Bitcoin market price has a far greater mining centralizing effect than +larger blocks ever will. Right now, miners with reasonably efficient +hardware and energy costs (.5W/GH mining hardware, 10 cents per kilowatt +hour power, $250 BTC price) spend about half of their mining income on +electricity. If the total Bitcoin market cap is under ~5 billion at the +next halving in July 2016, it's game over for all but the most efficient +(large) miners. The mining centralization that may occur with 8MB blocks in +2016 is nothing compared to the centralization that will occur if the total +Bitcoin market cap does not grow substantially between now and the next +halving. + +4.) Investors hate uncertainty, and the blocksize issue is adding a lot of +uncertainty right now, which makes the mining nightmare scenario outlined +above more likely. The entire ecosystem needs time to adjust and grow once +a Core scaling solution is adopted. Hopefully this issue will be revolved +well before the next halving in July 2016 so the market has time to adjust +and grow again. + +5.) Not-BitcoinXT is a really terrible idea. Mike has proven time and time +again that he will not blink or back down. The chances of Not-BitcoinXT +gaining 25% of the hashrate are pretty much nil, so in effect, all +Not-BitcoinXT will do is help XT reach the 75% threshold sooner and end up +putting more people on the losing side of the fork. + +--001a11c3c9b6af21fd051da91d30 +Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div><br></div>1.) Most people are running = +XT as a vote for bigger blocks and not because they specifically support BI= +P101. If Core supported bigger blocks, most XT users would switch back to C= +ore and XT would die.<br><br></div>2.) In this high stakes game of poker, X= +T just went all in, but Core still has the far better hand. There are many,= + many scaling solutions Core could adopt that would appease XT users enough= + to kill XT. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. The real question = +is whether or not anyone can provide enough Core leadership to reach "= +consensus". The longer it takes for Core to reach "consensus"= +;, the stronger XT gets.<br><br></div>3.) Bitcoin market price has a far gr= +eater mining centralizing effect than larger blocks ever will. Right now, m= +iners with reasonably efficient hardware and energy costs (.5W/GH mining ha= +rdware, 10 cents per kilowatt hour power, $250 BTC price) spend about half = +of their mining income on electricity. If the total Bitcoin market cap is u= +nder ~5 billion at the next halving in July 2016, it's game over for al= +l but the most efficient (large) miners. The mining centralization that may= + occur with 8MB blocks in 2016 is nothing compared to the centralization th= +at will occur if the total Bitcoin market cap does not grow substantially b= +etween now and the next halving.<br><br></div>4.) Investors hate uncertaint= +y, and the blocksize issue is adding a lot of uncertainty right now, which = +makes the mining nightmare scenario outlined above more likely. The entire = +ecosystem needs time to adjust and grow once a Core scaling solution is ado= +pted. Hopefully this issue will be revolved well before the next halving in= + July 2016 so the market has time to adjust and grow again.<br><br>5.) Not-= +BitcoinXT is a really terrible idea. Mike has proven time and time again th= +at he will not blink or back down. The chances of Not-BitcoinXT gaining 25%= + of the hashrate are pretty much nil, so in effect, all Not-BitcoinXT will = +do is help XT reach the 75% threshold sooner and end up putting more people= + on the losing side of the fork. <br></div> + +--001a11c3c9b6af21fd051da91d30-- + |