diff options
| author | Patrick Shirkey <pshirkey@boosthardware.com> | 2016-03-03 21:14:56 +1100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2016-03-03 10:15:00 +0000 |
| commit | 7e8e07856240c0ab25a532c6702daa777dc226fd (patch) | |
| tree | c18df2fab3c80f79473fce3fa51e9a1d67ee67a2 | |
| parent | 07561def51bcc6f6e69aca093d89852c4ab931e5 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-7e8e07856240c0ab25a532c6702daa777dc226fd.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-7e8e07856240c0ab25a532c6702daa777dc226fd.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Hardfork to fix difficulty drop algorithm
| -rw-r--r-- | 31/9818b79d82c3a9300f68fdb175b241fd00e6f2 | 115 |
1 files changed, 115 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/31/9818b79d82c3a9300f68fdb175b241fd00e6f2 b/31/9818b79d82c3a9300f68fdb175b241fd00e6f2 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..2ed5859ad --- /dev/null +++ b/31/9818b79d82c3a9300f68fdb175b241fd00e6f2 @@ -0,0 +1,115 @@ +Return-Path: <pshirkey@boosthardware.com> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0AF8D8C + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 3 Mar 2016 10:15:00 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from boosthardware.localdomain (boosthardware.com [88.198.122.139]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0DF61BF + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 3 Mar 2016 10:14:59 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by boosthardware.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 48) + id 8036716401F; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 11:14:56 +0100 (CET) +Received: from 178.73.210.16 + (SquirrelMail authenticated user pshirkey@boosthardware.com) + by boosthardware.com with HTTP; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 21:14:56 +1100 (EST) +Message-ID: <44382.178.73.210.16.1457000096.squirrel@boosthardware.com> +In-Reply-To: <20160302230213.GA888@muck> +References: <201603021456.15820.luke@dashjr.org> + <201603021542.29609.luke@dashjr.org> <56D71488.4080607@gmail.com> + <CAE-z3OWA0sn+=+qqs8BtiBe7T9Qdb4G8XAS_bX4hScq225iZQQ@mail.gmail.com> + <00e101d174b5$f2659060$d730b120$@voskuil.org> + <20160302230213.GA888@muck> +Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 21:14:56 +1100 (EST) +From: "Patrick Shirkey" <pshirkey@boosthardware.com> +To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.8-5.el5.centos.10 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +Importance: Normal +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD + 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: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 14:58:11 +0000 +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Hardfork to fix difficulty drop algorithm +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: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 10:15:00 -0000 + + +On Thu, March 3, 2016 10:02 am, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote: +> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 11:01:36AM -0800, Eric Voskuil via bitcoin-dev +> wrote: +>> > A 6 month investment with 3 months on the high subsidy and 3 months on +>> low subsidy would not be made… +>> +>> +>> +>> Yes, this is the essential point. All capital investments are made based +>> on expectations of future returns. To the extent that futures are +>> perfectly knowable, they can be perfectly factored in. This is why +>> inflation in Bitcoin is not a tax, it’s a cost. These step functions +>> are made continuous by their predictability, removing that +>> predictability will make them -- unpredictable. +> +> You know, I do agree with you. +> +> But see, this is one of the reasons why we keep reminding people that +> strictly speaking a hardfork *is* an altcoin, and the altcoin can change +> any rule currently in Bitcoin. +> +> It'd be perfectly reasonable to create an altcoin with a 22-million-coin +> limit and an inflation schedule that had smooth, rather than abrupt, +> drops. It'd also be reasonable to make that altcoin start with the same +> UTXO set as Bitcoin as a means of initial coin distribution. +> +> If miners choose to start mining that altcoin en-mass on the halving, +> all the more power to them. It's our choice whether or not we buy those +> coins. We may choose not to, but if 95% of the hashing power decides to +> go mine something different we have to accept that under our current +> chosen rules confirmations might take a long time. +> +> +> Of course, personally I agree with Gregory Maxwell: this is all fairly +> unlikely to happen, so the discussion is academic. But we'll see. +> + +Bitcoin is a success. + +The success has forced various hardfork discussions. + +Hard forking is contentious. If a softfork cannot be achieved the +alternate to a hardfork is creating a new bitcoin. ex bitcoin 2.0 + +Similar to silver, gold, palladium, etc... + +Bitcoins success partly stems from it's brand awareness. Any new +officially supported bitcoin will also benefit from this brand awareness. + +If the market values the new improved bitcoin they will put their money +into it. This doesn't require any consensus. + +Let the market decide which option has the most value. If everyone +switches to the new bitcoin then the old bitcoin miners will follow. + + + + + +-- +Patrick Shirkey +Boost Hardware Ltd + |