Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.215.41 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.215.41; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-la0-f41.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP3VCaFsW4+gPm2kCJ9z7oVUZYVaeNf=_cJWEWwh4ZxiPQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <16096345.A1MpJQQkRW@crushinator>
	<CABsx9T3-zxCAagAS0megd06xvG5n-3tUL9NUK9TT3vt7XNL9Tg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP3VCaFsW4+gPm2kCJ9z7oVUZYVaeNf=_cJWEWwh4ZxiPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 13:19:44 -0400
Message-ID: <CABsx9T21zjHyO-nh1aSBM3z4Bg015O0rOfYq7=Sy4mf=QxUVQA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d1010d0e48905172790a2
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step
	function
Precedence: list

--089e013d1010d0e48905172790a2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:

> Isn't that a step backwards, then? I see no reason for fee pressure to
>> exist at the moment. All it's doing is turning away users for no purpose:
>> mining isn't supported by fees, and the tiny fees we use right now seem to
>> be good enough to stop penny flooding.
>>
>
> Why not set the max size to be 20x the average size? Why 2x, given you
> just pointed out that'd result in blocks shrinking rather than growing.
>

Twenty is scary.

And two is a very neutral number: if 50% of hashpower want the max size to
grow as fast as possible and 50% are dead-set opposed to any increase in
max size, then half produce blocks 2 times as big, half produce empty
blocks, and the max size doesn't change. If it was 20, then a small
minority of miners could force a max size increase.  (if it is less than 2,
then a minority of minors can force the block size down)


As for whether there "should" be fee pressure now or not: I have no
opinion, besides "we should make block propagation faster so there is no
technical reason for miners to produce tiny blocks." I don't think us
developers should be deciding things like whether or not fees are too high,
too low, .....

-- 
--
Gavin Andresen

--089e013d1010d0e48905172790a2
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On T=
hu, May 28, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Mike Hearn <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"ma=
ilto:mike@plan99.net" target=3D"_blank">mike@plan99.net</a>&gt;</span> wrot=
e:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-l=
eft:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_e=
xtra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D=
"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D=
"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div>Isn&#39;t =
that a step backwards, then? I see no reason for fee pressure to exist at t=
he moment. All it&#39;s doing is turning away users for no purpose: mining =
isn&#39;t supported by fees, and the tiny fees we use right now seem to be =
good enough to stop penny flooding.<br></div></div></div></div></blockquote=
><div><br></div><div>Why not set the max size to be 20x the average size? W=
hy 2x, given you just pointed out that&#39;d result in blocks shrinking rat=
her than growing.</div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br>Twenty is scary.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br=
></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">And two is a very neutral number: if 50% =
of hashpower want the max size to grow as fast as possible and 50% are dead=
-set opposed to any increase in max size, then half produce blocks 2 times =
as big, half produce empty blocks, and the max size doesn&#39;t change. If =
it was 20, then a small minority of miners could force a max size increase.=
 =C2=A0(if it is less than 2, then a minority of minors can force the block=
 size down)</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></di=
v><div>As for whether there &quot;should&quot; be fee pressure now or not: =
I have no opinion, besides &quot;we should make block propagation faster so=
 there is no technical reason for miners to produce tiny blocks.&quot; I do=
n&#39;t think us developers should be deciding things like whether or not f=
ees are too high, too low, .....</div><div><br></div>-- <br><div class=3D"g=
mail_signature">--<br>Gavin Andresen<br></div>
</div></div>

--089e013d1010d0e48905172790a2--