Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 10:48:33 -0800
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Santino Napolitano <santino.napolitano@yandex.com>
Message-ID: <20151219184833.GC12893@muck>
References: <b19eb676c18ba451605cb02159541dd9@xbt.hk>
	<20151219174309.GB30640@muck> <1709761450550226@web28g.yandex.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0lnxQi9hkpPO77W3"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1709761450550226@web28g.yandex.ru>
Cc: "bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org"
	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Segregated witness softfork with moderate
 adoption has very small block size effect
Precedence: list


--0lnxQi9hkpPO77W3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 09:37:06PM +0300, Santino Napolitano wrote:
> I disagree. I think all client-side adoption of SW reliably tells you is =
that those implementers saw value in it greater than the cost of implementa=
tion. It's possible what they valued was the malleability fix and didn't se=
e the limited potential circumvention of MAX_BLOCK_SIZE material to their d=
ecision.
>=20
> They could just as easily attach an OP_RETURN output to all of their tran=
sactions which pushes "big blocks please" which would more directly indicat=
e their preference for larger blocks. You could also let hand-signed letter=
s from the heads of businesses explicitly stating their desire speak for th=
eir intentions vs. any of this nonsense. Or the media interviews, forum com=
ments, tweets, etc...

Note that English-language measures of Bitcoin usage/activity are very
misleading, as a significant - probably super majority - of economnic
activity happens outside the English language, Western world.
Centralized forums such as twitter and reddit are easily censored and
manipulated. Finally, we can't discount the significant amount of
non-law-abiding Bitcoin economic activity that does happen, and I do not
believe we should adopt consensus-building processes that shut those
stakeholders out of the discussion.

As an aside, I have a friend of mine who made a Bitcoin related product
with non-culturally-specific appeal.  I asked where she was shipping her
product, and it turned out that a super majority went to
non-English-speaking countries. (she might be willing to go on public
record about this; I can ask)

--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
00000000000000000188b6321da7feae60d74c7b0becbdab3b1a0bd57f10947d

--0lnxQi9hkpPO77W3
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQGrBAEBCACVBQJWdaZ+XhSAAAAAABUAQGJsb2NraGFzaEBiaXRjb2luLm9yZzAw
MDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMTg4YjYzMjFkYTdmZWFlNjBkNzRjN2IwYmVjYmRhYjNi
MWEwYmQ1N2YxMDk0N2QvFIAAAAAAFQARcGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3JncGV0
ZUBwZXRlcnRvZC5vcmcACgkQwIXyHOf0udzpYQgAg48S80Xmug73+6TCMfxGGh0z
FHk7cesDZGLkjdKxz6MFhznEpSaQYbzZrHiRTM5GSTjy5T0XYzn4essgDX5tJtWt
aETHvXc9wJk7dn8FDPCSr9C0FzIznqp8Tjl01eK09ZVUswQJlLk50sKA1ol1MSuw
Ct/EfxL+87JKYcSDTKXQcXi9wjUFB7wygN1AYfDKP2MD2pT/H0pCpE1u147kckWH
KCrP9DXiX37cl+C1gMNb2SOCYYMcVSEvB568ikCHHbfJ92Cg3fOsRHylqEZEJ71s
5u0edvpvbrUSGduO/8F2N0FOsY51H10WfbigKfRPJ3klsaOHvBY7OmZAYcBD0Q==
=QiBF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--0lnxQi9hkpPO77W3--