summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorAaron Voisine <voisine@gmail.com>2015-06-28 13:56:20 -0700
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2015-06-28 20:56:22 +0000
commit7390c04f9e4efbd986f2982abfc14aa50d1c9870 (patch)
tree27888e495c9039e506e6477c39ffbe57d9f88e07
parent2e74310e02386652d5c4500264c5ddd9417bc44d (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-7390c04f9e4efbd986f2982abfc14aa50d1c9870.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-7390c04f9e4efbd986f2982abfc14aa50d1c9870.zip
Re: [bitcoin-dev] The need for larger blocks
-rw-r--r--dc/a4af80f0020120b16f3add1c66e78c3906620f188
1 files changed, 188 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/dc/a4af80f0020120b16f3add1c66e78c3906620f b/dc/a4af80f0020120b16f3add1c66e78c3906620f
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..075ea6a10
--- /dev/null
+++ b/dc/a4af80f0020120b16f3add1c66e78c3906620f
@@ -0,0 +1,188 @@
+Return-Path: <voisine@gmail.com>
+Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
+ [172.17.192.35])
+ by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A1EBB19
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sun, 28 Jun 2015 20:56:22 +0000 (UTC)
+X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
+Received: from mail-qk0-f169.google.com (mail-qk0-f169.google.com
+ [209.85.220.169])
+ by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D30781BE
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sun, 28 Jun 2015 20:56:21 +0000 (UTC)
+Received: by qkeo142 with SMTP id o142so85115352qke.1
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sun, 28 Jun 2015 13:56:21 -0700 (PDT)
+DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
+ h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
+ :content-type; bh=bA3RJ2754ys28CsxDcdLkGyoMwppXDZZhRwtWPH8I14=;
+ b=nuJJhfk06jA7fGVj3Nl2t4VV5IKcMfyscoSU/QqEy8tWxQnanG+SuWAjki8wVGAz4y
+ sAT4rBihoaS9qL7gf+Uvdno94qiqmXLAJF4YTzP5xH5bQMLQbNVu9CntfQ7GNRUuZzEB
+ Hn1R3H31wOYfALMNM1N1ke5idyUgqDtYX5IYESIrciFRibQkhw1diD4Zc5QXI+c5HNTf
+ S4bFrHP9/ncYOcrgqQTITG2Xl2778+bZNxGqq6D4tEsQHuduwFSdhrwKUTASjdviWVv6
+ EjdSGg9FYeXbe75PXZ8XLQYv1d1b1N6n2I7hwbQHSieapp5p+3kMP4aabnlckF42G0tV
+ z3Ng==
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+X-Received: by 10.55.20.16 with SMTP id e16mr24747277qkh.71.1435524981074;
+ Sun, 28 Jun 2015 13:56:21 -0700 (PDT)
+Received: by 10.140.91.37 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Jun 2015 13:56:20 -0700 (PDT)
+In-Reply-To: <559022BE.2060503@mail.bihthai.net>
+References: <CAPg+sBjOj9eXiDG0F6G54SVKkStF_1HRu2wzGqtFF5X_NAWy4w@mail.gmail.com>
+ <20150627074259.GA25420@amethyst.visucore.com>
+ <20150627095501.C59B541A40@smtp.hushmail.com>
+ <558E78CB.7070207@mail.bihthai.net>
+ <CACq0ZD5WV-J1H7QA0F2wnErXVFJ3MSxWtQidPhVwaxauoHQz_A@mail.gmail.com>
+ <559022BE.2060503@mail.bihthai.net>
+Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2015 13:56:20 -0700
+Message-ID: <CACq0ZD5+4f19MCoiDxu8R7oHVki8VnA_f0TdUNGgnyk5PoJ+Mw@mail.gmail.com>
+From: Aaron Voisine <voisine@gmail.com>
+To: venzen@mail.bihthai.net
+Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1144d25490316a05199a34cd
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,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
+X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 20:41:24 +0000
+Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] The need for larger blocks
+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: Sun, 28 Jun 2015 20:56:22 -0000
+
+--001a1144d25490316a05199a34cd
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
+
+Moving the list to BCC, since this isn't really a technical discussion.
+
+On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Venzen Khaosan <venzen@mail.bihthai.net>
+wrote:
+
+>
+> Bitcoin's exchange rate, as a commodity money floating freely in the
+> market, will go up and down according to speculative cycles and we
+> should conceptually separate its valuation in fiat terms, from its
+> fundamental value which is: mathematical consensus, cryptographic
+> transaction security and censorship resistance, etc.
+
+
+I get the feeling we might be reasoning from different underlying
+assumptions, but I don't think you can separate value that way. Those
+fundamental properties were chosen to serve the goal of creating a digital
+commodity money. They are useful only in as much as they serve ends that
+people value. Consensus, security, censorship resistance are valuable
+because they are desirable properties for money to have.
+
+If you want to argue that the properties of bitcoin are valuable for other
+things besides money, that's fine, but those other uses presumably can be
+accomplished with tiny amounts of bitcoin, so don't appreciably increase
+demand.
+
+
+> These values are
+> critically reliant on Bitcoin's *degree of decentralization* for them
+> to remain true and for Bitcoin to retain its meaning, and, therefore,
+> its value. That is what I point out when I say "greater adoption has
+> not reflected in the price chart". And that may remain the case for
+> evermore because the value is in the protocol, the blockchain and its
+> utility and degree of decentralization, not in the chart or the size
+> of the user base
+>
+
+I think it depends on what you mean by "adoption". Adoption as a
+store-of-value must necessarily increase the market price given the
+restricted and eventually fixed supply. If we're talking about merchant
+adoption as a payment system, or increased transaction volume, the yes,
+these things have no direct impact on the price. They only impact the price
+indirectly in as much as they encourage further adoption as a
+store-of-value.
+
+
+> I argue that we already know what the value of Bitcoin is. In its
+> current form Bitcoin most likely fulfills 80% or 90% of its eventual
+> fully evolved value. Increased adoption will not strengthen the
+> fundamentals, so let's proceed with scaling that will safeguard
+> Bitcoin's fundamental value and implement protections that ensure
+> quality of decentralization.
+>
+
+Increased adoption does strengthen the fundamentals. The most important
+fundamental for money is how many other people standardize on the same
+money, and want to hold it. This drives it's price in terms of other
+commodities. You want to hold what everyone else wants to hold.
+
+Aaron Voisine
+co-founder and CEO
+breadwallet.com
+
+--001a1144d25490316a05199a34cd
+Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+
+<div dir=3D"ltr">Moving the list to BCC, since this isn&#39;t really a tech=
+nical discussion.<div><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gm=
+ail_quote">On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Venzen Khaosan <span dir=3D"ltr=
+">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:venzen@mail.bihthai.net" target=3D"_blank">venzen@m=
+ail.bihthai.net</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" =
+style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:r=
+gb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>Bitcoin&#39;s=
+ exchange rate, as a commodity money floating freely in the<br>
+market, will go up and down according to speculative cycles and we<br>
+should conceptually separate its valuation in fiat terms, from its<br>
+fundamental value which is: mathematical consensus, cryptographic<br>
+transaction security and censorship resistance, etc. </blockquote><div><br>=
+</div><div>I get the feeling we might be reasoning from different underlyin=
+g assumptions, but I don&#39;t think you can separate value that way. Those=
+ fundamental properties were chosen to serve the goal of creating a digital=
+ commodity money. They are useful only in as much as they serve ends that p=
+eople value. Consensus, security, censorship resistance are valuable becaus=
+e they are desirable properties for money to have.</div><div><br></div><div=
+>If you want to argue that the properties of bitcoin are valuable for other=
+ things besides money, that&#39;s fine, but those other uses presumably can=
+ be accomplished with tiny amounts of bitcoin, so don&#39;t appreciably inc=
+rease demand.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
+=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(20=
+4,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">These values are<br>
+critically reliant on Bitcoin&#39;s *degree of decentralization* for them<b=
+r>
+to remain true and for Bitcoin to retain its meaning, and, therefore,<br>
+its value. That is what I point out when I say &quot;greater adoption has<b=
+r>
+not reflected in the price chart&quot;. And that may remain the case for<br=
+>
+evermore because the value is in the protocol, the blockchain and its<br>
+utility and degree of decentralization, not in the chart or the size<br>
+of the user base<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I think it depends on =
+what you mean by &quot;adoption&quot;. Adoption as a store-of-value must ne=
+cessarily increase the market price given the restricted and eventually fix=
+ed supply. If we&#39;re talking about merchant adoption as a payment system=
+, or increased transaction volume, the yes, these things have no direct imp=
+act on the price. They only impact the price indirectly in as much as they =
+encourage further adoption as a store-of-value.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><bloc=
+kquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-=
+width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;paddin=
+g-left:1ex">
+I argue that we already know what the value of Bitcoin is. In its<br>
+current form Bitcoin most likely fulfills 80% or 90% of its eventual<br>
+fully evolved value. Increased adoption will not strengthen the<br>
+fundamentals, so let&#39;s proceed with scaling that will safeguard<br>
+Bitcoin&#39;s fundamental value and implement protections that ensure<br>
+quality of decentralization.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Increased =
+adoption does strengthen the fundamentals. The most important fundamental f=
+or money is how many other people standardize on the same money, and want t=
+o hold it. This drives it&#39;s price in terms of other commodities. You wa=
+nt to hold what everyone else wants to hold.</div></div></div><div class=3D=
+"gmail_extra"><div><br>Aaron Voisine</div><div>co-founder and CEO<br><a hre=
+f=3D"http://breadwallet.com/" target=3D"_blank">breadwallet.com</a></div></=
+div></div>
+
+--001a1144d25490316a05199a34cd--
+