diff options
author | Milly Bitcoin <milly@bitcoins.info> | 2015-06-26 22:14:47 -0400 |
---|---|---|
committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-06-27 02:14:58 +0000 |
commit | c7ab514af42f171ee6e7e5b01282d0bf6f7a7ece (patch) | |
tree | 0a80cb58aba713ec49969345172bc3cb05989c5e | |
parent | 8571b721c53956415951ff9ac0c38b4285d0bfaf (diff) | |
download | pi-bitcoindev-c7ab514af42f171ee6e7e5b01282d0bf6f7a7ece.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-c7ab514af42f171ee6e7e5b01282d0bf6f7a7ece.zip |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Draft BIP : fixed-schedule block size increase
-rw-r--r-- | a9/e1b92d04d0f97fdf37e49ea7034904d54324b1 | 105 |
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 +> + + + |