Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <jgarzik@bitpay.com>) id 1Z40EZ-0003HP-6Q for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 14 Jun 2015 05:13:27 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com designates 209.85.218.48 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.218.48; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com; helo=mail-oi0-f48.google.com; Received: from mail-oi0-f48.google.com ([209.85.218.48]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Z40EY-0000Mr-ET for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 14 Jun 2015 05:13:27 +0000 Received: by oial131 with SMTP id l131so8336361oia.3 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; Sat, 13 Jun 2015 22:13:21 -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=+H+OgAvT0ipniTAY1b+AbDERegmvn0GFXGx6huqfgs4=; b=GjGiimicS60fAHfmlqEEiJEtADHkxGAx3LGtv5Zo9DF4u+7t9rbyghwvzFnkcYP2Vd nvhIBJ96ijOII+Yau+jNs+6sX0mydpNNWsFbT2dUOXZlqJP+iruMDUrNDKXDRbDDQZu8 BXzI4g63KvAOBb8mCKh3q8Xece01FWC+IY2hJOpVljWpkdgJmTAC4xDcxZ3FphxLxWsr cfs8GDwJT3Gt+OHsr26ZIPmBt77r98I2S9bIjUBgUUbXCS/3hC2KiN6O47o8jvW7sGyO //EGqMQOYDozkA6fghi0Uzqy6d51s6F6DVsf8E4tPmENmL6f3qoz8Z9ElMhSoGta29WQ SEGA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnIZuSUtoPbMZqjMKMPuj/3HljPTMke0eZk6yxYuQew9Yz6UpjCkKbzGYjNLsjnRYIXfHfd X-Received: by 10.60.134.132 with SMTP id pk4mr18809445oeb.7.1434258801003; Sat, 13 Jun 2015 22:13:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.202.108.149 with HTTP; Sat, 13 Jun 2015 22:13:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3BB36FC7-9212-42A1-A756-A66929C15D4F@gmail.com> References: <20150612181153.GB19199@muck> <CAJN5wHVj=KfQ3_KYOKee9uq4LNPwQ7x5nGuKDHEMUqGF4LSDLg@mail.gmail.com> <CAFzgq-y5xBSXexVi0mJw_w89R2_AHJCgmj=gLN4CK_-YaO4-eg@mail.gmail.com> <3BB36FC7-9212-42A1-A756-A66929C15D4F@gmail.com> From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com> Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2015 01:13:00 -0400 Message-ID: <CAJHLa0Oh0wm_1SynFdCu+WkVD-gTGk0ZUNgQV0GVj0-3zL=zzw@mail.gmail.com> To: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b47252c59a6520518736677 X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1Z40EY-0000Mr-ET Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] User vote in blocksize through fees X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2015 05:13:27 -0000 --047d7b47252c59a6520518736677 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 1:08 AM, Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com> wrote: > 2) BIP100 has direct economic consequences=E2=80=A6and particularly for m= iners. It > lends itself to much greater corruptibility. > > What is the alternative? Have a Chief Scientist or Technical Advisory Board choose what is a proper fee, what is a proper level of decentralization, a proper growth factor? --=20 Jeff Garzik Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ --047d7b47252c59a6520518736677 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 1:08 AM, Eric Lombrozo <span dir= =3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:elombrozo@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">elomb= rozo@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div cla= ss=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 = .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">2) BIP100 has direct econ= omic consequences=E2=80=A6and particularly for miners. It lends itself to m= uch greater corruptibility.<br><br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>What is= the alternative?=C2=A0 Have a Chief Scientist or Technical Advisory Board = choose what is a proper fee, what is a proper level of decentralization, a = proper growth factor?</div></div><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></div>-- <br><d= iv class=3D"gmail_signature">Jeff Garzik<br>Bitcoin core developer and open= source evangelist<br>BitPay, Inc. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<a href=3D"https://b= itpay.com/" target=3D"_blank">https://bitpay.com/</a></div> </div></div> --047d7b47252c59a6520518736677--