diff options
author | Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org> | 2015-07-30 11:02:43 -0700 |
---|---|---|
committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-07-30 18:03:04 +0000 |
commit | 81f1a512758b214eb3d2fcb3f48fbebd87591a5b (patch) | |
tree | 9b1d53da223a2a7c5b46b68a0816e89376c02fdf | |
parent | bcd97a18128d00309106a6c1d3e6363ac896c678 (diff) | |
download | pi-bitcoindev-81f1a512758b214eb3d2fcb3f48fbebd87591a5b.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-81f1a512758b214eb3d2fcb3f48fbebd87591a5b.zip |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Why Satoshi's temporary anti-spam measure isn'ttemporary
-rw-r--r-- | 9d/9262c294bde597e6fa91c178c5b5661ea27ecc | 165 |
1 files changed, 165 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/9d/9262c294bde597e6fa91c178c5b5661ea27ecc b/9d/9262c294bde597e6fa91c178c5b5661ea27ecc new file mode 100644 index 000000000..869884d66 --- /dev/null +++ b/9d/9262c294bde597e6fa91c178c5b5661ea27ecc @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@ +Return-Path: <mark@friedenbach.org> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 935AE405 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 30 Jul 2015 18:03:04 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from mail-io0-f170.google.com (mail-io0-f170.google.com + [209.85.223.170]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6CC6112 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 30 Jul 2015 18:03:03 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by ioii16 with SMTP id i16so61662715ioi.0 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 30 Jul 2015 11:03:03 -0700 (PDT) +X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=1e100.net; s=20130820; + h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date + :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; + bh=fJyugUl+Q91H3addQZoGPuXRf8Cpk++uaW0wwgq3Kp0=; + b=MA3fplZwpNGOr+iGvC3z0brzeX76hvMookA1G+u5Z0WoF3lKqAKyrkxfPeKXrE8cRp + qWBS1K3tYkpxZouA4jZD0IyMozKHkq4+p+SAFIBELfyAjbagVTPW+pbIJe/V7Cq2eH1o + Kt2xnEcPpPGfUq6z/0mk0qM7I5oBs4SQGo0d159WaKvn9w3xONfwYPyB9j1xKinQDTdD + PcksWNDIzgJuoesiMG+mqA1oDSVwKh35qiyRbrZj3L/z/biFTs1SJ9Ju/etk44yih0aG + j5QZ8+KWqzehxlxwyxHZH2oM78RqIBTvRL5IYFtoywi/bYqAirep1iTAhxr9j83VUInw + JfgA== +X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkPPMLAHM4I2shWpS+NdNy+KOq0mpqHWOu/nNNrKocJMC3bbtNrWvkhJL7fvzTF126zIlSr +X-Received: by 10.107.137.13 with SMTP id l13mr13770403iod.159.1438279383426; + Thu, 30 Jul 2015 11:03:03 -0700 (PDT) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Received: by 10.107.158.140 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 11:02:43 -0700 (PDT) +X-Originating-IP: [50.0.37.37] +In-Reply-To: <4330019.CpFTjXpmfm@coldstorage> +References: <1B7F00D3-41AE-44BF-818D-EC4EF279DC11@gmail.com> + <CABaSBaxyQja9bqDsyfWubR1R-Xf2tqmSmU-GW_z7VQTxbBagrQ@mail.gmail.com> + <1689926.ZjkxyJjokn@coldstorage> <4330019.CpFTjXpmfm@coldstorage> +From: Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org> +Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 11:02:43 -0700 +Message-ID: <CAOG=w-vZ+5fBxpZ2bVgg_H9VD4cmSDhtkaOu4_UH3gvw-QfkEw@mail.gmail.com> +To: Thomas Zander <thomas@thomaszander.se> +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ed350bcc309051c1b8375 +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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 +Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Why Satoshi's temporary anti-spam measure + isn'ttemporary +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, 30 Jul 2015 18:03:04 -0000 + +--001a113ed350bcc309051c1b8375 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 + +They aren't really so closely related as you are implying, since bitcoin is +a trustlessly decentralized system. At present every participant needs to +be able to validate the entire chain in order to be certain that their copy +of the ledger state is correct, and miners need to be able to incrementally +validate blocks in particularly short timeframes or else. + +It is possible for a decentralized system like bitcoin to scale via +distribution in a way that introduces minimal trust, for example by +probabilistic validation and distribution of fraud proofs. However changes +to bitcoin consensus rules (mostly soft-forks) are required in order to +make this possible. + +I don't want to discourage thinking about scaling bitcoin in such ways, as +it is a viable medium term proposal. However right now with the bitcoin +that exists today parallel distribution and decentralization are at odds +with each other. + +On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev < +bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: + +> On Thursday 30. July 2015 18.07.40 Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev wrote: +> > Remember when we went from single-core CPUs to multi-core (and +> > hyperthreading)? Developers were saying it was useless because all apps +> > were still single-threaded. And now, 15 years later, there are +> fantastic +> > frameworks to make this easy. +> > +> > Same will happen with distributed. Any assumption you wrote above is not +> > inherent in the technology. +> +> My brain went a bit to fast (dinner was being served, she made me close the +> laptop...) and wrote distributed above while the topic is decentralized. +> Its not entirely wrong, even; Libraries or approaches that do distributed +> will +> be useful for decentralized systems. ;) +> +> -- +> Thomas Zander +> _______________________________________________ +> bitcoin-dev mailing list +> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev +> + +--001a113ed350bcc309051c1b8375 +Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div>They aren't really so closely related as you= + are implying, since bitcoin is a trustlessly decentralized system. At pres= +ent every participant needs to be able to validate the entire chain in orde= +r to be certain that their copy of the ledger state is correct, and miners = +need to be able to incrementally validate blocks in particularly short time= +frames or else.<br><br></div>It is possible for a decentralized system like= + bitcoin to scale via distribution in a way that introduces minimal trust, = +for example by probabilistic validation and distribution of fraud proofs. H= +owever changes to bitcoin consensus rules (mostly soft-forks) are required = +in order to make this possible.<br><br></div>I don't want to discourage= + thinking about scaling bitcoin in such ways, as it is a viable medium term= + proposal. However right now with the bitcoin that exists today parallel di= +stribution and decentralization are at odds with each other.<br></div><div = +class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 a= +t 10:42 AM, Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"= +mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev= +@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gm= +ail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-le= +ft:1ex"><span class=3D"">On Thursday 30. July <a href=3D"tel:2015%2018.07.4= +0" value=3D"+12015180740">2015 18.07.40</a> Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev w= +rote:<br> +> Remember when we went from single-core CPUs to multi-core (and<br> +> hyperthreading)? Developers were saying it was useless because all app= +s<br> +> were=C2=A0 still single-threaded.=C2=A0 And now, 15 years later, there= + are fantastic<br> +> frameworks to make this easy.<br> +><br> +> Same will happen with distributed. Any assumption you wrote above is n= +ot<br> +> inherent in the technology.<br> +<br> +</span>My brain went a bit to fast (dinner was being served, she made me cl= +ose the<br> +laptop...) and wrote distributed above while the topic is decentralized.<br= +> +Its not entirely wrong, even; Libraries or approaches that do distributed w= +ill<br> +be useful for decentralized systems.=C2=A0 ;)<br> +<div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5"><br> +--<br> +Thomas Zander<br> +_______________________________________________<br> +bitcoin-dev mailing list<br> +<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.= +linuxfoundation.org</a><br> +<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" = +rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail= +man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br> +</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div> + +--001a113ed350bcc309051c1b8375-- + |