summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorMilly Bitcoin <milly@bitcoins.info>2015-06-26 22:14:47 -0400
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2015-06-27 02:14:58 +0000
commitc7ab514af42f171ee6e7e5b01282d0bf6f7a7ece (patch)
tree0a80cb58aba713ec49969345172bc3cb05989c5e
parent8571b721c53956415951ff9ac0c38b4285d0bfaf (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-c7ab514af42f171ee6e7e5b01282d0bf6f7a7ece.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-c7ab514af42f171ee6e7e5b01282d0bf6f7a7ece.zip
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Draft BIP : fixed-schedule block size increase
-rw-r--r--a9/e1b92d04d0f97fdf37e49ea7034904d54324b1105
1 files changed, 105 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/a9/e1b92d04d0f97fdf37e49ea7034904d54324b1 b/a9/e1b92d04d0f97fdf37e49ea7034904d54324b1
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..9154a161d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/a9/e1b92d04d0f97fdf37e49ea7034904d54324b1
@@ -0,0 +1,105 @@
+Return-Path: <milly@bitcoins.info>
+Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
+ [172.17.192.35])
+ by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA785323
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sat, 27 Jun 2015 02:14:58 +0000 (UTC)
+X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
+Received: from mail.help.org (mail.help.org [70.90.2.18])
+ by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D45F9A8
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sat, 27 Jun 2015 02:14:57 +0000 (UTC)
+Received: from [10.1.10.25] (B [10.1.10.25]) by mail.help.org with ESMTPA
+ ; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 22:14:52 -0400
+References: <CABsx9T2HegqOBqd1jijk1bZBE6N+NH8x6nfwbaoLBACVf8-WBQ@mail.gmail.com>
+ <20150623192838.GG30235@muck>
+ <CABsx9T2wsc=+seaWs=v5d_kPpC4u-xTnsjuPMO7PYhQN+0-KAQ@mail.gmail.com>
+ <20150623204646.GA18677@muck>
+ <CABsx9T3-CbB0k2aKMqRYseUQ2dfW9ANAuYb2MPAw1S+_bF7_=w@mail.gmail.com>
+ <20150626192528.GC10387@muck> <558DCF2F.5080305@bitcartel.com>
+To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+From: Milly Bitcoin <milly@bitcoins.info>
+Message-ID: <558E0717.40502@bitcoins.info>
+Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 22:14:47 -0400
+User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
+ Thunderbird/38.0.1
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+In-Reply-To: <558DCF2F.5080305@bitcartel.com>
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
+ version=3.3.1
+X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
+ smtp1.linux-foundation.org
+Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Draft BIP : fixed-schedule block size increase
+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: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 02:14:58 -0000
+
+It is actually not odd at all that a formal process is dismissed out of
+hand. It is all about protecting turf and holding on to power. If
+there is a well defined process then that takes the power out of the
+hands of the people who have been running the show and making up the
+rules. In some cases developers see Bitcoin as their "baby" and they
+think they must control it in order to protect it but in doing so they
+can become an "overprotective parent." Another problem is that some
+people in Bitcoin have disdain for the people they need such as
+financial, economic, security, and legal experts. Some think they are
+smarter than those people because they discovered Bitcoin first and they
+think their knowledge of Bitcoin means they are also superior in all
+these other areas. I have seen some discussions of developers who have
+met with people from the financial sector and they come out of the
+meeting with the attitude that all the experts are stupid and that
+Bitcoiners have everything figured out. One developer tried to tell me
+that you can't do systems engineering in Bitcoin because it involves
+security rather than safety (of course that issue has been well vetted
+and NIST has a whole series of documents to address that very issue
+http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/PubsSPs.html).
+
+Russ
+
+
+
+
+On 6/26/2015 6:16 PM, Simon Liu wrote:
+> If Bitcoin is a $3bn project where stakeholder interests are to be
+> safeguarded, or if Bitcoin is to be compared to a civil engineering
+> project where life and death is at stake, it seems only logical that a
+> well-defined and well-documented process be introduced to properly
+> evaluate proposed changes. Although too late for the block size debate,
+> it seems odd that discussion of such a process is often dismissed out of
+> hand.
+>
+> To maintain the current approach of supermajority consensus, based
+> around ingrained wisdom, personal preference and unwritten rules would
+> suggest that Bitcoin is still an experiment, in which case perhaps any
+> decision regarding the block size should be based upon technical merit
+> alone rather than economic interest.
+>
+> --Simon
+>
+>> You're the one proposing a change here; we're evaluating the safety of
+> that change.
+>
+>> In civil engineering we have enough experience with disasters to know
+>> that you can't give into political pressure to do potentially dangerous
+>> things until the consequences are well understood; hopefully we'll learn
+>> that in the consensus cryptography space before a big disaster rather
+>> than after.
+> _______________________________________________
+> bitcoin-dev mailing list
+> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
+>
+
+
+